Bookmark and Share



Tamron AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro  Hot PDF Print E-mail
Lenses Tamron
User rating
out of 5
Editor's rating
out of 5
Reviewed by:

View details
Read editor review
image
Camera Gear Rentals
User Images
image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image image
Lens Summary

Overview

While overall dimensions are confined to the absolute minimum, the new SP AF70-200mm F/2.8 zoom lens is packed with features that allow stress-free photography: a versatile MFD of just 37.4" over the entire zoom range; best-in-class maximum macro magnification ratio of 1:3.1 at f=200mm; and an advantageous Internal Focusing (IF) system. The new tele-zoom lens covers a desirable Focal length range of 70mm medium telephoto to 200mm telephoto when mounted on full-size format SLR cameras and a focal length range from 109mm to 310mm* ultra telephoto when mounted on a DSLR camera with an APS-C sized imager.

Lens Specifications

Generic Lens Specifications
Lens Type: Zoom
Lens Special Features: Macro
IS / VR / OS: None
Min Focal Length (mm): 70
Max Focal Length (mm): 200
Number of Elements: 18
Element Groups: 13
Max Aperture: 2.8
Minimum Aperture: 32
Diaphragm Blades: 9
Closest Focus Distance (m): 0.95
Maximum Magnification: 1.3
Filter Type: Screw In
Filter Diameter (mm): 77
Diameter at widest (mm): 89
Lens Length (mm): 194
Weight (g): 1150
Release Date: Spring 08

Details


Specifications

Model A001
Lens Construction (Groups/Elements) 13/18

Angle of view
( )=the figures when used on APS-C sized digital camera

Diagonal 34°21'-12°21' (22°33'-7°59')
Horizontal 28°51'-10°17' (18°49'-6°38')
Vertical 19°16'-6°31' (12°22'-4°15')
Diaphragm Blade Number 9
Minimum Aperture F/32
Minimum Focus Distance 37.4in.(0.95m) throughout the range
Macro Magnification Ratio 1:3.1 (at f=200mm, MFD: 0.95m)
Filter Diameter ø77
Weight 40.6oz (1150g) (without tripod mount)
Diameter x Length ø3.5 x 7.6in.
(ø89.5 x 194.3mm)
Accessory Flower-shaped Lens hood & case
Mount Canon -Available Nikon with Built-In Motor - Coming Soon
Pentax - Coming Soon
Sony - Coming Soon

Price Tracking

USA Lens Price History

Field of View of this lens

Visualise the Field of View of this lens

Help and Feedback on the FOV tool here

Amazon Price US

Amazon Price UK


User Lens Reviews

Average user rating from: 67 user(s)

Overall rating (weighted)
4.1
Sharpness
4.1
Build Quality
4.1
AF Speed
4.1
Value for Money
4.2
 

Add new review


3 of 3 people found the following review helpful

Great lens for a great price!, Sunday, 27 June 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
5.0
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
Before I bought this lens, the biggest fear I have is the slow auto focus in low light. After shooting with it for a few days I can safely that it is almost a none factor for amature photographers and most people who rarely shoots in very low light conditions, I would say if you shoots in day light most of the time, dont worry about it, I felt like it focuses almost as fast as the 18-55 kit lens that comes with nikon cameras.

The other thing I worried about is the size and weight, it looks intimating for people who are not used to this class of lens. And because I use a nikon D60 a fairly small and light body for SLR, I was worried it would be very unbalanced and hard to use. After taking a it with me and holding it in my hand for a entire day at the San Diego Zoo, I felt like its not bad at all! just make sure to hold by the neck of the lens instead of the camera body when you are walking around. With the lens hood attached, it will make anyone look like a professional

The price/image quality ratio is outstanding considering the Nikon 70-200 and Canon 70-200 F2.8 both cost an arm and a leg to get. For this price range, I think there is hardly a lens that can beat this in picture quality and functionality ( atleast for the price I paid for, around 650 refurb from amazonwarehouse ). On Dpreview, they rated the picture quality on par in most cases with the nikon and cannon lens, and in some situations even surpassing them. F2.8 creates great bokeh, and the 70-200 range is perfect for shooting outdoors/macros.

Only draw backs I can think of, is that you need another lens such as the 18-55 f2.8/3.5-5.3 or 35mm f1.8 for shooting close range/wide angle shots. and because there is no image stabilization, a tripod is a must for shooting with slower shutter speeds, from my experience 1/30 is fairly ok, but at 1/6 I had to shoot multiple times to get image that is not overly blurry. ( the lens is fairly heavy, so people with stronger arm strength may get better results shooting free hand, my gf found it difficult to do this since the lens is heavy for her )

In conculsion I would strongly recommend this lens to anyone who are looking for a zoom lens for shooting outdoors/macro/people at day time. It is a great alternative to the 18-200vr considering the image quality, f2.8, price. If you do consider using this lens in low light conditions you should probably look at getting a tripod and flash.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

One of the best pressional telephoto lenses, Sunday, 20 June 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
3.3
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
4.0
Before purchasing this lens, I did a lot of research and read plenty of reviews. Not everyone said this lens was good but I went to a local camera store in town and got to test one out. I have to say hands down that I have no doubts about this lens and am very happy to have spent the money on it. I recommend this lens to anyone who don't want to spend an arm and a leg for a professional telephoto lens but still want quality for what they pay for. I cannot say it's going to overcome the Canon Lens with IS of the same caliber but definitely up there along with it.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful

No brainer, Wednesday, 16 June 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
5.0
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
All of you out there that are reading this review of the Tamron 70-200 are probably in one of two categories. 1) Looking for a fast low light zoom but don't wont to pay the price of the Nikon/Canon 2.8 tele or 2) Your looking for a backup telezoom for your Nikon/Canon. I do wedding, family, sports shoots as a side biz and I'm in category 1. You're probably worried about buying it and it not Auto Focusing fast enough or having some other issues that you've read......because that was a concern of mine. Let me put you at ease.....don't worry, the Tamron 70-200 is fantastic! In fact I was so pleased that I ended up purchasing other Tamron lenses. The 28-75 f/2.8 and also the 17-35 f/2.8-4mm and all 3 have been exceptional to say the least.

AF - Lets get to what everyone is concerned about...Auto Focus. I have two Nikons that I've use this lens on. A D5000 (cropped 1.5x sensor) that I use for quick pics of the kids and vacations (non paying gigs) and a D700 full frame for my professional paying gigs and if the kids have very special events like my daughters kindergarten graduation. I'm really not seeing what everyone is fussing about this lens AF's just as fast as my Nikon DX lens....55-200 VR for example. I use this lens for in and out doors and have never had a problem with it auto focusing. It's like any lens you use.....take a person dressed in black standing in front of a black background and any lens will have a hard time trying to find the focus. Adjust your focal point on the face where the Contrast is different and boom it finds it. This is only rare occasions but it does happen sometimes and it also happens with my Nikkors. One thing I do notice is my D700 AF quicker compared to my D5000. It's not by much but it is noticeable, but not an issue. I honestly believe it's due to the difference of the AF systems in the two cameras. D700 is known for its superb AF.

AF Accuracy - Spot on, never a problem. I have my D700 set where it will not release the shutter unless it's in focus and I've never have had a problem with it being fooled or hunting for focus unless it's in a dark closet.

AF loudness - Is the Tamron louder than the Nikkor lenses when Auto focusing? Yes it is. It's not quiet but it's not loud by any means. You have to remember you're the one looking through the viewfinder and of course you're going to hear it. Others won't even notice it. The shutter closing/opening when taking a picture is twice as loud as the Tamron AF system. It's not even an issue. I don't know if I would take it out to the Amazon taking pics of dangerous and exotic animals where my life depended on it......but then again you'd still probably be ok. Remember the shutter is louder than the auto focus.....again it's not even an issue I don't think.

Sharpness - Super sharp at all focal lengths. I've actually have been very pleased with all of my Tamrons and the sharpness it produces. When hand held at 200mm 2.8 it is a tad softer but 95% of that is due to Camera shake. I've tested this and have mounted it on a tripod at that setting with sharp as a tack results. Vibration Reduction or Tamrons VC would be a huge plus but it's not totally necessary.

Construction - Very well made, very hefty and durable. I've used Nikons version and it's a fantastic piece of engineering that is weather sealed, built like a tank and is without a doubt more durable. I think this is where the price difference is. The Tamron is not cheap feeling by any means. When you hold it you know its made very well but the Nikon just takes that to another level which is why its $2000 plus US dollars and the fact this it has Vibration Reduction. If you're going to be going through some rugged terrain on a paid photo shoot it would only make sense to purchase the Nikon. Honestly if you took care of the Tamron and kept it clean I'm sure it could make it out fine also but I wouldn't try it.

Overall - Superb sharpness, old school but very effective AF system and AF accuracy, AF noise is not a problem and is really not even loud enough to even mention in this review but I know people have brought it up and are concerned. I'm 100% pleased. Even if I would have paid more I still would have been pleased but that's the beauty of Tamron. Giving you a great professional lens at a great price. Quick story: I was outside under the patio just a couple of days ago taking pics of the massive storm that we had here in Oklahoma using this lens. I would AF on the clouds and press the shutter and to my surprise the shutter would not release. Remember I have it set where it will not take the pic unless it's in perfect focus. After a few times of this I was getting very frustrated and thought to myself........this is what everyone must be talking about when they mean the Tamron has trouble AFing. Few seconds later the shutter goes off taking pics of nothing. I'm thoroughly confused now and then it hit me. Just a day earlier I was taking some self portraits for my online profile and I was using the auto delay 20 second timer and I still had it in that setting.......sigh.....I was quick to blame the Tamron....poor Tamron.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful

70-200 womder macro zoom!, Saturday, 29 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
This lens is very easy to get attached to, with its excellent sharpness, and good close up ability. Works well with my K-x, and balances very well on a monopod, or a tripod, or even handheld! It's macro ability is impressive, as it is easy to focus manually, which often is a bonus when taking macro shots.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

great lens, great price, Friday, 21 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
5.0
No brainer for 1/3 the price of canon glass.

I'm using it primarily for video and the fact that it focuses in the same direction as canon glass does is very good.

do I care if its 10% less then canon's glass ? no because that is just such a splitting hairs over nothing issue. this is a way better lens then you could of bought 10+ years ago. in fact if its slightly less that helps REDUCE moire problems. its still a nice contrasty lens. it has a nice look, focus speed is fine unless you shoot fast moving stuff. if I made my living shooting stills ( I used to actually ), maybe I might want the 100% best AKA canon 70-200 II 2.8 IS $2800 lens... but unless you are competing at the top of the game, I really doubt anyone will know the difference.... really. its an awesome piece of glass. I used to have a real FD 200 2.8 and this lens is better.

build quality is decent, its heavy but that should be expected for this sort of lens

the snap back for manual focus ring is very cool. wish all lenses did this. it makes a AF switch seem pretty dopey in comparison because you don't have to move your hand anywhere to change modes. its seemless between manual and auto modes which is great when shooting fast moving subjects.

great lens, great price, no complaints !
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful

Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 for Nikon D300, Wednesday, 12 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
5.0
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
I was doing my research prior to buying this lens for couple of weeks. I read everything I could find on the internet about this lens as well as it's competitors.

First, let me provide you with quick summary of my findings:

1. Major competitors for this lens are:
a. Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 OS. This lens is very sharp according to all reviews I read. It has fast and precise auto focus, high quality image stabilization. This is clearly the best lens out there. The negative side is cost (3 times as much as Tamron!) and watch out for defective lens (quality control issues). Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S NIKKOR Lens For Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
b. Sigma 70-200mm. This version doesn't have Image Stabilizer. Compare to Tamron it has faster focus but lower quality glass. Image Resolution is significantly lower and shows worse results with teleconverters then you get with Tamron. There are some complains about focus motor goes bad and Coating of the lens is easy to scratch. I also want to mention that tests showed slight color cast with Sigma lens. There is a new version available for pre-order that has image stabilization. Nobody tested this new version yet, also cost went up 2 times! Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
c. Nikon 80-200mm 2.8 - No Image Stabilization. This lens received good feedback from user community and from pros. It uses "screwdriver" to drive focus which makes it slower then Tamron and glass is good but not as sharp as Tamron. Cost is about 50% more. There are number of complains about quality of manual/auto focus switch that breaks by it-self. Cost of repair is about $300 to $400 (don't remember exact number). Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

2. Now lets talk about Tamron 18-200mm for Nikon. I got this lens 2 days ago and shot lots of subjects and test charts to calibrate focus and evaluate performance.
a. Focus speed - This is THE MOST common complain about this lens. The focus motor on this lens is faster then screwdriver used on 50mm 1.8 prime or Nikon 80-200mm. It's not fast but acceptable in most situations. I usually track my subject for a little while before pulling trigger, so speed should not be a problem. Sometimes this lens takes a while to focus (like 2 seconds). It happens when room has low lights and subject doesn't have contrast edge. Tip: release shutter and press again and it will focus way quicker second time. Focusing performance is fine with flashlight focus assist lamp. It's interesting how all pros complain about focus speed on Tamron but all of them ok with Nikon 80-200mm (which is slower). I feel that focus is not great, but acceptable sacrifice for high quality glass and lower cost.
b. Resolution - I was concerned with results from dpreview that showed major degradation in sharpness at 135mm 2.8. I'm happy to report that it's not a case with my sample. Resolution is very good from 70-150mm and goes somewhat softer by 200mm at 2.8 aperture. Stopping down to 3.2 from 2.8 increases resolution significantly for entire zoom range. Note: 3.2 vs. 2.8 is only 1/3 EV stop. The sweet aperture spot for my sample is 3.5 to 5.6. I got very decent results from 3.2 to 16. In general, sharpness in sweet spot is the same as my prime 50mm 1.8 lens at 4.0 aperture (the sharpest aperture for this lens).
c. Contrast - somewhat low at 2.8 but is fine by 3.2 aperture setting.
d. Manual Focus - I liked clutch type focus ring. If you pull focus ring toward camera body it goes to manual focus, push it outside and auto focus is engaged. It's fast and easy. Try it couple of times and it feels natural to use. However, it's not easy to focus at 200mm 2.8. Depth of field is extremely shallow and any minor errors are very easy to see.
e. Calibration results - lens had front focus which I was able to correct using Nikon D300 lens adjustment settings.

Conclusion: I feel that this lens is a good choice for people who wants high quality pictures. Professionals may want to go all the way up to Nikon 70-200mm. Tamron has awesome optics, good quality construction, acceptable autofocus and reasonable price.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful

Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 for Nikon D300, Wednesday, 12 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
I was doing my research prior to buying this lens for couple of weeks. I read everything I could find on the internet about this lens as well as it's competitors.

First, let me provide you with quick summary of my findings:

1. Major competitors for this lens are:
a. Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 OS. This lens is very sharp according to all reviews I read. It has fast and precise auto focus, high quality image stabilization. This is clearly the best lens out there. The negative side is cost (3 times as much as Tamron!) and watch out for defective lens (quality control issues). Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S NIKKOR Lens For Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
b. Sigma 70-200mm. This version doesn't have image stabilizer. Compare to Tamron it has faster focus but lower quality glass. Image resolution is significantly lower and shows worse results with teleconverters then you get with Tamron. There are some complains about focus motor goes bad and coating of the lens is easy to scratch. I also want to mention that tests showed slight color cast with Sigma lens. There is a new version available for pre-order that has image stabilization. Nobody tested this new version yet, also cost went up 2 times! Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
c. Nikon 80-200mm 2.8 - No Image Stabilization. This lens received good feedback from user community and from pros. It uses "screwdriver" to drive focus which makes it slower then Tamron and glass is good but not as sharp as Tamron. Cost is about 50% more. There are number of complains about quality of manual/auto focus switch that breaks by it-self. Cost of repair is about $300 to $400 (don't remember exact number). Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

2. Now lets talk about Tamron 70-200mm for Nikon. I got this lens 2 days ago and shot lots of subjects and test charts to calibrate focus and evaluate performance.
a. Focus speed - This is THE MOST common complain about this lens. The focus motor on this lens is faster then screwdriver used on 50mm 1.8 prime or Nikon 80-200mm. It's not fast but acceptable in most situations. I usually track my subject for a little while before pulling trigger, so speed should not be a problem. Sometimes this lens takes a while to focus (like 2 seconds). It happens when room has low lights and subject doesn't have contrast edge. Tip: release shutter and press again and it will focus way quicker second time. Focusing performance is fine with flashlight focus assist lamp. It's interesting how all pros complain about focus speed on Tamron but all of them ok with Nikon 80-200mm (which is slower). I feel that focus is not great, but acceptable sacrifice for high quality glass and lower cost.
b. Resolution - I was concerned with results from dpreview that showed major degradation in sharpness at 135mm 2.8. I'm happy to report that it's not a case with my sample. Resolution is very good from 70-150mm and goes somewhat softer by 200mm at 2.8 aperture. Stopping down to 3.2 from 2.8 increases resolution significantly for entire zoom range. Note: 3.2 vs. 2.8 is only 1/3 EV stop. The sweet aperture spot for my sample is 3.5 to 5.6. I got very decent results from 3.2 to 16. In general, sharpness in sweet spot is the same as my prime 50mm 1.8 lens at 4.0 aperture (the sharpest aperture for this lens).
c. Contrast - somewhat low at 2.8 but is fine by 3.2 aperture setting.
d. Manual Focus - I liked clutch type focus ring. If you pull focus ring toward camera body it goes to manual focus, push it outside and auto focus is engaged. It's fast and easy. Try it couple of times and it feels natural to use. However, it's not easy to focus at 200mm 2.8. Depth of field is extremely shallow and any minor errors are very easy to see.
e. Calibration results - lens had front focus which I was able to correct using Nikon D300 lens adjustment settings.

Conclusion: I feel that this lens is a good choice for people who wants high quality pictures. Professionals may want to go all the way up to Nikon 70-200mm. Tamron has awesome optics, good quality construction, acceptable autofocus and reasonable price.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 for Nikon D300, Wednesday, 12 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
5.0
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
I was doing my research prior to buying this lens for couple of weeks. I read everything I could find on the internet about this lens as well as it's competitors.

First, let me provide you with quick summary of my findings:

1. Major competitors for this lens are:

a. Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 OS. This lens is very sharp according to all reviews I read. It has fast and precise auto focus, high quality image stabilization. This is clearly the best lens out there. The negative side is cost (3 times as much as Tamron!) and watch out for defective lens (quality control issues). Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S NIKKOR Lens For Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

b. Sigma 70-200mm f2.8. This version doesn't have image stabilizer. Compare to Tamron it has faster focus but lower quality glass. Image resolution is significantly lower and shows worse results with teleconverters then you get with Tamron. There are some complains about focus motor goes bad and coating of the lens is easy to scratch. I also want to mention that tests showed slight color cast with Sigma lens. There is a new version available for pre-order that has image stabilization. Nobody tested this new version yet, also cost went up 2 times! Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

c. Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 - No Image Stabilization. This lens received good feedback from user community and from pros. It uses "screwdriver" to drive focus which makes it slower then Tamron and glass is good but not as sharp as Tamron. Cost is about 50% more. There are number of complains about quality of manual/auto focus switch that breaks by it-self. Cost of repair is about $300 to $400 (don't remember exact number). Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

2. Now lets talk about Tamron 70-200mm for Nikon. I got this lens 2 days ago and shot lots of subjects and test charts to calibrate focus and evaluate performance.

a. Focus speed - This is THE MOST common complain about this lens. The focus motor on this lens is faster then screwdriver used on 50mm 1.8 prime or Nikon 80-200mm. It's not fast but acceptable in most situations. I usually track my subject for a little while before pulling trigger, so speed should not be a problem. Sometimes this lens takes a while to focus (like 2 seconds). It happens when room has low lights and subject doesn't have contrast edge. Tip: release shutter and press again and it will focus way quicker second time. Focusing performance is fine with flashlight focus assist lamp. It's interesting how all pros complain about focus speed on Tamron but all of them ok with Nikon 80-200mm (which is slower). I feel that focus is not great, but acceptable sacrifice for high quality glass and lower cost.

b. Resolution - I was concerned with results from dpreview that showed major degradation in sharpness at 135mm f2.8. I'm happy to report that it's not a case with my sample. Resolution is very good from 70-170mm and goes somewhat softer by 200mm at f2.8 aperture. Stopping down to f3.2 from f2.8 increases resolution significantly for entire zoom range. Note: 3.2 vs. 2.8 is only 1/3 EV stop. The sweet aperture spot for my sample is f3.5 to f8. I got very decent results from f3.2 to f16. In general, sharpness in sweet spot is the same as my prime 50mm f1.8 lens at f4.0 aperture (the sharpest aperture for this lens).

c. Contrast - somewhat low at f2.8 but is fine by f3.2 aperture setting.

d. Manual Focus - I liked clutch type focus ring. If you pull focus ring toward camera body it goes to manual focus, push it outside and auto focus is engaged. It's fast and easy. Try it couple of times and it feels natural to use. However, it's not easy to focus at 200mm 2.8. Depth of field is extremely shallow and any minor errors are very easy to see.

e. Macro performance - Tamron is the only lens out of all listed that offers you reasonable macro performance. Sigma and Nikon can't focus as close as Tamron can.

f. Calibration results - lens had front focus which I was able to correct using Nikon D300 lens adjustment settings.

Couple of words about Image stabilization. Image Stabilization allows you to use slower shutter speed by an average of 3 EV stops. Let's say you can make sharp picture without image stabilization at 1/150s with 200mm zoom.Image stabilization would allow you to make similar sharp image at 1/50s 200mm. Image stabilization works great with static objects, but doesn't help with moving objects. You need at least or faster then 1/200s to avoid blurry pictures.

Conclusion: I feel that this lens is a good choice for people who wants high quality pictures. Professionals may want to go all the way up to Nikon 70-200mm. Tamron has awesome optics, good quality construction, acceptable autofocus and reasonable price.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 for Nikon D300, Wednesday, 12 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
4.5
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
I was doing my research prior to buying this lens for couple of weeks. I read everything I could find on the internet about this lens as well as it's competitors.

First, let me provide you with quick summary of my findings:

1. Major competitors for this lens are:

a. Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 OS. This lens is very sharp according to all reviews I read. It has fast and precise auto focus, high quality image stabilization. This is clearly the best lens out there. The negative side is cost (3 times as much as Tamron!) and watch out for defective lens (quality control issues). Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S NIKKOR Lens For Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

b. Sigma 70-200mm f2.8. This version doesn't have image stabilizer. Compare to Tamron it has faster focus but lower quality glass. Image resolution is significantly lower and shows worse results with teleconverters then you get with Tamron. There are some complains about focus motor goes bad and coating of the lens is easy to scratch. I also want to mention that tests showed slight color cast with Sigma lens. There is a new version available for pre-order that has image stabilization. Nobody tested this new version yet, also cost went up 2 times! Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

c. Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 - No Image Stabilization. This lens received good feedback from user community and from pros. Resolution is good but not as sharp as Tamron. Cost is about 50% more. There are number of complains about quality of manual/auto focus switch that breaks by it-self. Cost of repair is about $300 to $400 (don't remember exact number). Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

2. Now lets talk about Tamron 70-200mm for Nikon. I got this lens 2 days ago and shot lots of subjects and test charts to calibrate focus and evaluate performance.

a. Focus speed - This is THE MOST common complain about this lens. The focus motor on this lens is faster then screwdriver used on 50mm 1.8 prime, but not even close to Nikkor 16-85mm VR. It's not fast but acceptable in most situations. I usually track my subject for a little while before pulling trigger, so speed should not be a problem. Sometimes this lens takes a while to focus (like 2 seconds). It happens when room has low lights or subject doesn't have contrast edge. Tip: release shutter and press again and it will focus way quicker second time. Focusing performance is fine with flashlight focus assist lamp. It's interesting how all pros complain about focus speed on Tamron but all of them ok with Nikon 80-200mm (which is slower). I feel that focus is not great, but acceptable sacrifice for high quality glass and lower cost.

b. Resolution - I was concerned with results from dpreview that showed major degradation in sharpness at 135mm f2.8. I'm happy to report that it's not a case with my sample. Resolution is very good from 70-170mm and goes somewhat softer by 200mm at f2.8 aperture. Stopping down to f3.2 from f2.8 increases resolution significantly for entire zoom range. Note: 3.2 vs. 2.8 is only 1/3 EV stop. The sweet aperture spot for my sample is f3.5 to f8. I got very decent results from f3.2 to f16. In general, sharpness in sweet spot is the same as my prime 50mm f1.8 lens at f4.0 aperture (the sharpest aperture for this lens).

c. Contrast - somewhat low at f2.8 but is fine by f3.2 aperture setting.

d. Manual Focus - I liked clutch type focus ring. If you pull focus ring toward camera body it goes to manual focus, push it outside and auto focus is engaged. It's fast and easy. Try it couple of times and it feels natural to use. However, it's not easy to focus at 200mm 2.8. Depth of field is extremely shallow and any minor errors are very easy to see.

e. Macro performance - Tamron is the only lens out of all listed that offers you reasonable macro performance. Sigma and Nikon can't focus as close as Tamron can.

f. Calibration results - lens had front focus which I was able to correct using Nikon D300 lens adjustment settings.

Couple of words about Image stabilization. Image Stabilization allows you to use slower shutter speed by an average of 3 EV stops. Let's say you can make sharp picture without image stabilization at 1/150s with 200mm zoom.Image stabilization would allow you to make similar sharp image at 1/50s 200mm. Image stabilization works great with static objects, but doesn't help with moving objects. You need at least or faster then 1/200s to avoid blurry pictures.

Conclusion: I feel that this lens is a good choice for people who want high quality pictures and don't want to spend $2,000. Professionals may want to go all the way up to Nikon 70-200mm. Tamron has awesome optics, good quality construction, acceptable autofocus and reasonable price.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 for Nikon D300, Wednesday, 12 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
4.5
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
I was doing my research prior to buying this lens for couple of weeks. I read everything I could find on the internet about this lens as well as it's competitors.

First, let me provide you with quick summary of my findings:

1. Major competitors for this lens are:

a. Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 OS. This lens is very sharp according to all reviews I read. It has fast and precise auto focus, high quality image stabilization. This is clearly the best lens out there. The negative side is cost (3 times as much as Tamron!) and watch out for defective lens (quality control issues). Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S NIKKOR Lens For Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

b. Sigma 70-200mm f2.8. This version doesn't have image stabilizer. Compare to Tamron it has faster focus but lower quality glass. Image resolution is significantly lower and shows worse results with teleconverters then you get with Tamron. There are some complains about focus motor goes bad and coating of the lens is easy to scratch. I also want to mention that tests showed slight color cast with Sigma lens. There is a new version available for pre-order that has image stabilization. Nobody tested this new version yet, also cost went up 2 times! Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

c. Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 - No Image Stabilization. This lens received good feedback from user community and from pros. Resolution is good but not as sharp as Tamron. Cost is about 50% more. There are number of complains about quality of manual/auto focus switch that breaks by it-self. Cost of repair is about $300 to $400 (don't remember exact number). Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

2. Now lets talk about Tamron 70-200mm for Nikon. I got this lens 2 days ago and shot lots of subjects and test charts to calibrate focus and evaluate performance.

a. Focus speed - This is THE MOST common complain about this lens. The focus motor on this lens is faster then screwdriver used on 50mm 1.8 prime, but not even close to Nikkor 16-85mm VR. It's not fast but acceptable in most situations. I usually track my subject for a little while before pulling trigger, so speed should not be a problem. Sometimes this lens takes a while to focus (like 2 seconds). It happens when room has low lights or subject doesn't have contrast edge. Tip: release shutter and press again and it will focus way quicker second time. Focusing performance is fine with flashlight focus assist lamp. It's interesting how all pros complain about focus speed on Tamron but all of them ok with Nikon 80-200mm (which is slower). I feel that focus is not great, but acceptable sacrifice for high quality glass and lower cost.

b. Resolution - I was concerned with results from dpreview that showed major degradation in sharpness at 135mm f2.8. I'm happy to report that it's not a case with my sample. Resolution is very good from 70-170mm and goes somewhat softer by 200mm at f2.8 aperture. Stopping down to f3.2 from f2.8 increases resolution significantly for entire zoom range. Note: 3.2 vs. 2.8 is only 1/3 EV stop. The sweet aperture spot for my sample is f3.5 to f8. I got very decent results from f3.2 to f16. In general, sharpness in sweet spot is the same as my prime 50mm f1.8 lens at f4.0 aperture (the sharpest aperture for this lens).

c. Contrast - somewhat low at f2.8 but is fine by f3.2 aperture setting.

d. Manual Focus - I liked clutch type focus ring. If you pull focus ring toward camera body it goes to manual focus, push it outside and auto focus is engaged. It's fast and easy. Try it couple of times and it feels natural to use. However, it's not easy to focus at 200mm 2.8. Depth of field is extremely shallow and any minor errors are very easy to see.

e. Macro performance - Tamron is the only lens out of all listed that offers you reasonable macro performance. Sigma and Nikon can't focus as close as Tamron can.

f. Calibration results - lens had front focus which I was able to correct using Nikon D300 lens adjustment settings.

Couple of words about Image stabilization. Image Stabilization allows you to use slower shutter speed by an average of 3 EV stops. Let's say you can make sharp picture without image stabilization at 1/200s with 200mm zoom.Image stabilization would allow you to make similar sharp image at 1/25s 200mm. Image stabilization works great with static objects, but doesn't help with moving objects. You need shutter speed faster then 1/200s to avoid blurry pictures.

Conclusion: I feel that this lens is a good choice for people who want high quality pictures and don't want to spend $2,000. Professionals may want to go all the way up to Nikon 70-200mm. Tamron has awesome optics, good quality construction, acceptable autofocus and reasonable price.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful

Stop working within 2 months, Tuesday, 11 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
1.0
Sharpness
1.0
Build Quality
1.0
AF Speed
1.0
Value for Money
1.0
This is my second Tamron F/2.8 70-200MM. The first one I got was defective right out of the box and I returned right away to Amazon. Once I got my replacement lens it worked fine...for 2 months. Now it won't auto-focus and it has passed the return window. I sent it in to Tamron and I got back an estimate. $400 for a $700 lense. I called in and they said that there was evidence of shock damage. I had only used this lens 1/2 dozen times and it sits in a pelican hard case. There is no way it could have had shock damage. None of my Nikon lenses exhibit any damage or problems auto-focusing. The person I spoke with at Tamron says there was "major damage." This is obviously a very faulty product if my first one was DOA and the second one died after 2 months. My friends always told me to stay away from generics but I had good experiences with Tokina. I guess I should have just stayed away from Tamron. Lesson learned.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Good for Cost, Poor for Workhorse Lens, Sunday, 09 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
3.5
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
3.0
Being a photographer that mainly shoots sports this lens is on my camera more than any other lens. I understand it has slow focus speed and is not the best lens. I only payed $700 for it so I understand I can't have the best.

But I still paid $700 for it and it has been in the shop more this month than in my hands.

I sent it in the first time for a focus problem that was fixed.

Then I noticed a large amount of Err 01 and the person on the phone said it was a broken aperture error. So I sent it in again. When I got it back the second time. there was specs on the back element and on the front. Also during the first event of shooting it I received another Err 01. So I sent it back for the third time. When I was on the phone for the third repair trip they said the Err 01 issue was not looked at the second time, even though I stated this issue both over the phone and in the paperwork sent with the lens. It has been at their repair facility now for 8 days and should be back on Monday. I hope this is the end of repairs for this lens, but I have lost trust in it and will most likely replace it with the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 non IS this summer.

For someone who puts this lens through its paces on an almost daily basis this lens has its problems.

Also the focus motor in this lens is terribly loud, which can become a problem when shooting an event where being discrete is a priority.

If you are a casual hobbyist and don't have the money to buy the Canon version of this lens, don't worry too much about the issues I laid forth here. It produces wonderful photos for its cost.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Great shooter!, Sunday, 02 May 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
5.0
A perfect companion for the above SP 28-75mm model. This extends the range from 70 to 200mm at the same f/2.8 and also with image stabilization. Compare this sub $700 lens to the canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS and you'll see that one goes for north of $1500. You do the math!
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful

Fantastic Tele Zoom Regardless of Price and ... Gr, Friday, 23 April 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
4.5
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
This is a really superb telephoto lens: The best one I've ever used. Bright, fast focus, crisp sharpness and contrast, beautifully balanced, small (overall size) in its class, breeze and a joy to use. Focuses down to about 30 inches which gets you about 3:1 and lovely sharp close-ups. Accurate focusing on stop-down (no discernable back/forward focus with changing f-stop). Beautiful, smooth bokeh. Very little Chromatic aberration; and it's never prominent or distracting. (I chose this lens over the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens for Pentax Digital SLR Cameras due to the prominent bokeh CA in the SIGMA for close focus images, one of the main reasons I bought this lens. Refer to the dpreview reviews of these two lenses for a comparison.)

I've been shooting for over 30 years now, using primes (from 16mm to 400mm in 35mm film work) and zooms, APOs and EDs and ATXs, etc. I like this telephoto better than any other I've ever used. The sharpness corner to corner, no Vignetting, beautiful contrast and bokeh, brilliant color, balanced handling, well-engineered package, lens hood, tripod ring, zoom and focus rings size, texture, location, and operation, the complete internal design (internal focus and zoom, no rotation of the front element) are all super. It comes with a nice draw-string padded case/sack that works efficiently in the camera bag. With the APS-C sensor in my camera (K-X, great camera) this lens is the 35mm equivalent of ~105-300mm f/2.8, a superbly useful range for a middle-range tele.

I would put this lens up against any telephoto zoom in this range. The only negatives I can mention are: Size (what do you expect at f/2.8, IF, IZ? but as noted, it is smaller than the others except SIGMA) and the fact that there are no teleconverters that are compatible with it (for Pentax).
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Great experience with Tamron AF 70-200mm, Monday, 19 April 2010


Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
What a bargain for a wonderful lens for my Sony A700 DSLR. I had read about the superb quality of this lens which is priced at less than 1/2 of the cost of the Sony 70-200mm. I am really fussy about lenses and this lens is so good it surprised even me. I am just delighted with my purchase. This lens is sharp wide open and at close up as well as full zoom. The contrast and color are great. I found out that it is a superb lens as [...] promised.
Was this review helpful to you? yes     no

View all user reviews
 
< Prev   Next >
[ Back ]

News | Forum | Lens Reviews | Teleconverter Reviews | About Us | Contact Us | Glossary | How To
Lens News | Lens List | © 2008 Lens-reviews.com