70-200 F4L vs 70-300 VC

So now that we have seen what the Tamron 70-300 VC can do, does anyone think it is a better choice than the 70-200 F4L in this price category? Mainly I want a smaller than a 70-200 f2.8 upgrade to my 55-250 with faster AF for under $700. 70-200 gives me f4 at 200mm, 70-300VC gives me great stabilization at an extra 100mm of reach for $200 less.

I love mine, took a few more shots today with it.

Shot with my new Tamron 70-300vc, I have never shot birds before, but this could be fun.

I have both lenses, the new Tamron 70-300mm, VC 4-5.6 and the Canon 70-200 F4L (non-IS) and I plan on doing some side-by-side shots this weekend (if it doesn't rain) with my new 60D. I'll post them here when completed.

MTAtech wrote in post #11101415
I have both lenses, the new Tamron 70-300mm, VC 4-5.6 and the Canon 70-200 F4L (non-IS) and I plan on doing some side-by-side shots this weekend (if it doesn't rain) with my new 60D. I'll post them here when completed.

Can't wait

What is a good site to host the images?

I have both lenses, the new Tamron 70-300mm, VC 4-5.6 and the Canon 70-200 F4L (non-IS) and I plan on doing some side-by-side shots this weekend (if it doesn't rain) with my new 60D. I'll post them here when completed.

MTAtech wrote in post #11101490
What is a good site to host the images?

photobucket is the easiest. Flickr is the most popular.

Imageshack..?

Based on the tests Ive done with mine, Ill hazard a guess here for those testing against their 70-200 f4L non-IS.

I think you will find the "L" focuses faster, but the overall IQ will be indistinguishable from one lens to the other. For me, the excellent VC trumps the faster AF of the "L". However, if you had the 70-200 f4 IS, my answer would be different - in this case the "L" would win at everything under 201mm.

An important question to ask is what do you plan to shoot with the lens. The 70-200 F4 should have better image quality and it is slightly faster at 200mm than the Tamron. However, the Tamron gives you another 100mm and VC (Tamron's IS), with really good, but not matching the 70-200 IQ.

I recently bought the Tamron because I found 200mm to not be long enough in the places I wanted a tele zoom. The IQ is really good and the VC works well for shots of non-moving subjects.

MephitBlue wrote in post #11101966
An important question to ask is what do you plan to shoot with the lens. The 70-200 F4 should have better image quality .....

I'm going to stop right there with your statement because how do we know that the L has better quality?

tkbslc wrote in post #11101793
photobucket is the easiest. Flickr is the most popular.

Rivest wrote in post #11101811
Imageshack..?

THANKS!

MephitBlue wrote in post #11101966
An important question to ask is what do you plan to shoot with the lens. The 70-200 F4 should have better image quality and it is slightly faster at 200mm than the Tamron. However, the Tamron gives you another 100mm and VC (Tamron's IS), with really good, but not matching the 70-200 IQ.

As previously said, we don't know that for sure. However, in a few days I hope to answer that question in a scientific way, side-by-side comparisons.

I'm trying now to determine test methodology. This is what I've come up with so far and comments are welcome:

Test each lens as follows:
1) Sharpness Test on same subject - three images; 70mm, ~135mm, 200mm. Camera mounted on tripod at f/11 to illuminate any shake blur and depth of field blur that may be mistaken for 'softness.'

2) Hand-held test at 1/30 sec. at 200mm. This tests the advantage of Tamron's VC compared to Canon's lower f/4 (at 200mm, the Tam is likely to be f/5.6 min.)

Subjective tests: Speed at AF; feel; etc.

The 70-300 is an impressive lens for the money (keep that in mind):

• Highest MTF in it's class (which, you will note, is different from the 70-200...)
  
• Gives you a stabilization system that is top notch (Tamron is known to have a killer IS system, so long as you don't plan on panning...)
  
• Has the new USD AF (which is SILENT, but not as fast as one would think)
  
• Will cost you - after rebate - $400.00. Only!
  

If moving subjects in low light were my target, would f4 be fast enough anyway?

MTAtech wrote in post #11102190
Test each lens as follows:
1) Sharpness Test on same subject - three images; 70mm, ~135mm, 200mm. Camera mounted on tripod at f/11 to illuminate any shake blur and depth of field blur that may be mistaken for 'softness.'

2) Hand-held test at 1/30 sec. at 200mm. This tests the advantage of Tamron's VC compared to Canon's lower f/4 (at 200mm, the Tam is likely to be f/5.6 min.)

Subjective tests: Speed at AF; feel; etc.

The only thing I might mention is that, for your sharpness testing, f/8 would probably work out the best; go much farther than that and you'll have people wondering if diffraction started to take effect and ruin the results.