any tamron 70-200 f2.8 users?

[pai]

(haha, long time no post, but haven't given up photography or km/sony)

hi guys, need some advice on this...

i'm looking for a lens in the 70-200 range. i have a beercan and a 100-300 APO, which are both great, but in some situations i feel i need something faster (both focus and aperture)

(am using an a850)

i'm thinking about the tamron 70-200 because:

a) much cheaper than the sony
b) lighter than the sony or sigma
c) it's black
d) apparently sharper than the sigma? esp at closer distances

but reviews say that the focusing is loud, slow, and sometimes misses/hunts. i'm just wondering how big the problem really is

also, anyone know where i can find this in s'pore (and for around how much?)

thanks much for your help

 

[torak]

i didnt use Tamron 70-200 f2.8 before, but read quite a number of reviews online and in dyxum saying that tamron's 70-200 is not sharp wide open at f2.8 compared to Minolta, Sigma and Sony. Needs to be stepped down to f4 then it can be sharp, and frankly speaking, if thats the case I rather use the beercan.

Why dont you consider 2nd hand Minolta 80-200 f2.8? A black (non HS) version isnt that ex. Saw a few for sale in BnS.

 

[pai]

yup i considered the 80-200 also, but the 10mm off the wide end and the close focus distance bug me a bit

 

[Galdor]

Long time never see you bro.

Just bite the bullet and get the xiao bai bah. :thumbsup:

 

[pai]

the white colour very attention grabbing leh...

also, don't use this sort of lens as often as my 17-35, seems funny to spend so much

anyone else got anything to say about the tamron?

 

[android17]

there's various threads in dyxum forums comparing Tamron and Tokina 70-200 and 80-200 f2.8 lens vs Minolta 80-200 and Sony/Minolta 70-200 f2.8.

Basically it all comes down to the same thing. The Sonys and Minoltas will be sharper than the Tamrons and Tokinas.

The Tamrons and Tokinas is soft at f2.8, and needs to stop down to f4 to get good sharpness.

So it will depend on your choice. If u need to use f2.8, then stick to the Minolta and Sony variants. If you can live with f4 and above, then the cheaper Tokina and Tamron variants should fit your needs.

 

[Titan10k]

but reviews say that the focusing is loud, slow, and sometimes misses/hunts. i'm just wondering how big the problem really is

From what I read (not own experience), the slow and loud focusing is associated with the internal motor on the C/N version. Since Alpha version doesn't have that motor, the problem is much less.

 

[pai]

thanks for the advice guys. guess it's best to try for myself

 

[Hanalore]

It seems to be (based on the reviews here) that the difference between Sony/Minolta versus Tamron/Sigma is that the former is sharper.

But is the difference between the Sony(70200) and Minolta (80200) that significant to command such a price premium?

Also is the diff between the minolta 80200 "G" and "non G" that great?

 

[wongjunhao]

I own a Tamron 70-200. Hmm.. I don't know how to review but it's sure very sharp (at least for my copy). However, the plastic feel is not very great.

 

[kch076]

I owned the Tamron 70-200 and I certainly find its IQ sharp wide open and not losing to Sony as I tested both at Cathy Photo before I bought.

Having said that, the focus speed, the built and the solidness is no where near the sony.

I would rather have a sony anytime but value for money is definitely the Tamron.

Test and see it yourself at CP.

 

[Tachi]

Sorry to use this thread, as your original thread WTS : Rodinal can't reply nor PM you. I am interested in the Rodinal, please PM me your selling price, thank you!

Tachi..

 

[hmphanoodle]

Sorry to use this thread, as your original thread WTS : Rodinal can't reply nor PM you. I am interested in the Rodinal, please PM me your selling price, thank you!

Tachi..

hi, pai is having trouble with his cs account. he can't post or get PMs. he'll get back to you when it's sorted out