What?! 18-270 VC SHARPER than 300 f2.8 IS?!

No, of course not The Canon lenses were positioned further back to achieve identical framing as the Tamron at 270mm. Notice also not only the sharpness and crispness of the prime but its complete lack of color fringing (around the tire and within the metal rim). Subject distance approximately 100 feet. Anyway just a quick little comparison for those debating whether to get the Tamron VC superzoom or the Canon 300 f2.8 IS as their Hawaii honeymoon walkaround lens

Tamron 18-270 VC @ 270mm f6.3

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

man that thing is sharp, i got to get one soon...

About as expected.

That 300 is amazingly sharp wide open. The 70-200 with the kenko is pretty close as well. Impressive.

Gotta say that the copies of the 300 2.8 IS were by far the sharpest lenses I've ever used by a long shot. Ridiculously good. Heh, nice inflammatory title Test results seem to be about on-par with what should be expected!

You bastard. I saw the title, saw who posted it, and pretty much jumped into this thread. Your secret agenda in pushing me to get this lens is beginning to have an effect.

Yeah, that 300 f2.8 is just awesome

Great thread title.

mavericksupersonic wrote in post #6911433
That 300 is amazingly sharp wide open. The 70-200 with the kenko is pretty close as well. Impressive.

Yep, the 70-200 + 1.4x at f6.3 is 1-1/3 stops down from wide open, so it's right about at its sweet spot with the TC on. Definitely a strong performer at this setting.

Jim G wrote in post #6911472
Gotta say that the copies of the 300 2.8 IS were by far the sharpest lenses I've ever used by a long shot. Ridiculously good. Heh, nice inflammatory title Test results seem to be about on-par with what should be expected!

Inflammatory title? Me?!

perryge wrote in post #6911707
You bastard. I saw the title, saw who posted it, and pretty much jumped into this thread. Your secret agenda in pushing me to get this lens is beginning to have an effect.

You're weak, Perry. Face it. Resistance is futile. I may be a "bastard", but you're gonna be broke.

Roy Webber wrote in post #6912434
Yeah, that 300 f2.8 is just awesome

+1!

S.Horton wrote in post #6912578
Great thread title.

Well well well. If it ain't Sam I am. Where's my dinner?!

Great selling title!
Your thread title follows the popular trend many news agencies and news TV stations use to draw attention. Just place an outrageously shocking question in the headline. Of course it's not true, but afterall we are not stating it is true, we're just asking it, right?

Oh, Lightrules, by the way, my second Tamron 18-270VC copy is working perfectly (you know I had the bad copy with inaccurate focus and softness.)

blimy look at the purple fringing, even the 70/200 combo has it.
Rob

To me there is nothing like the 300.

@LR

<munching sounds>

Turkey, slow-cooked sweet potatoes, homemade pecan/pumpkin pie, green beans w/toasted almond slivers.

That's actually all here, if you want to stop by.

....patience, when I get to LA.......

;}

Hi.
First, thanks for the recent reviews!

About this particular set, do you have that same wheel with the tamron at 270mm but stopped down to say f8 or f11?

It would be interesting to see what it that lens can do when offered some "help". Still even the wide open shot can get improved quite a bit with some post processing.

This is btw why my Sigma 18-200OS is now on my camera most of the time, since I bought my 580exII flash. Lately I shoot at home most of the time, the range is awesome and help catch candids I would miss if I had to switch lenses. I stop it down, and the flash is powerfull enough to get excellent exposures at 1/250 and iso 200 at f8.

Erez

LightRules wrote in post #6910838
No, of course not The Canon lenses were positioned further back to achieve identical framing as the Tamron at 270mm. Notice also not only the sharpness and crispness of the prime but its complete lack of color fringing (around the tire and within the metal rim). Subject distance approximately 100 feet. Anyway just a quick little comparison for those debating whether to get the Tamron VC superzoom or the Canon 300 f2.8 IS as their Hawaii honeymoon walkaround lens

Tamron 18-270 VC @ 270mm f6.3

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'