Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 24, 2007, 3:44 PM   #11
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

NHL has probably nailed it again AJ.

The Tamron 200-500 has had some very good reviews in the UK magazines.

And photozone.de seem to like it too:

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/..._563/index.htm

Pretty much as good as the 100-400 in the range they overlap, and still pretty good at 500.

Craig
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2007, 5:58 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
NHL has probably nailed it again AJ.

The Tamron 200-500 has had some very good reviews in the UK magazines.

And photozone.de seem to like it too:

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/..._563/index.htm

Pretty much as good as the 100-400 in the range they overlap, and still pretty good at 500.

Craig
I shall have to have a look at the tamron, 100-400 is too expensive really
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2007, 6:16 PM   #13
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

aladyforty wrote:
Quote:
I have thought of this lens but have been told it is soft
Probably some fairy tale from a Canon diehard... :lol::-):G

I don't subscribe to that group even though I have that 8.5lbs 500L f/4 IS
-> You may wish to PM bmullen in the wildlife section. His images from the Tamron are just oustanding: http://www.pbase.com/bmullen



Quote:
I shall have to have a look at the tamron, 100-400 is too expensive really
BTW if you 'need' IS the Sigma 80-400 with their Optical Stabilization also compares quite favorably with my 100-400L but for less. There's a link here with images from both lenses with the 1.4x TC on (i.e. 560mm f/8 ): http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=65
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2007, 10:14 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
aladyforty wrote:
Quote:
I have thought of this lens but have been told it is soft
Probably some fairy tale from a Canon diehard... :lol::-):G

I don't subscribe to that group even though I have that 8.5lbs 500L f/4 IS
-> You may wish to PM bmullen in the wildlife section. His images from the Tamron are just oustanding: http://www.pbase.com/bmullen



Quote:
I shall have to have a look at the tamron, 100-400 is too expensive really
BTW if you 'need' IS the Sigma 80-400 with their Optical Stabilization also compares quite favorably with my 100-400L but for less. There's a link here with images from both lenses with the 1.4x TC on (i.e. 560mm f/8 ): http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=65
Thanks, yes Ive seen bullens shots, very nice. as for the sigma yes ive looked into that, still a bit expensive right now. im just spending too much time looking at big lenses when in reality i am getting good shots with the 70-200 F4 and the TC. Its becoming addictive:-)Maybe I need to step back and look at a tamron secondhand or wait for a while and make do with what I have
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2007, 11:54 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 169
Default

Alady40,

1- If you decide to get rid of your 70-200, I am your man !

2- Tamron 50-500 samples :

http://www.pbase.com/johnsgallery/image/59778912

Cheers

philgib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 7:16 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

philgib wrote:
Quote:
Alady40,

1- If you decide to get rid of your 70-200, I am your man !

2- Tamron 50-500 samples :

http://www.pbase.com/johnsgallery/image/59778912

Cheers
No chance sorry. i love the 70-200 F4 L. Ive used it without any problem getting sharp shots with and without a TC and no IS.



After much consideration into my needs Im getting an EF 400 F 5.6 L prime in lens in about three weeks time:-)
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 10:53 AM   #17
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

We're just splitting hair between the Tamron 200-500 and the EF-400 L according to photozone MTF's resolution @400mm:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

Canon EF 400mm f/5.6 L
@ 400mm F/5.6 F/8 F11
Center 1657 1767 1768
Border 1655 1767 1738

Tamron 200-500
@ 400mm F/5.6 F/8 F/11
Center 1651.5 1749 1730.5
Border 1631.5 1711 1695


-> IMO you can't lose either way
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 11:57 AM   #18
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
We're just splitting hair between the Tamron 200-500 and the EF-400 L according to photozone MTF's resolution @400mm:
what do the charts say about focus speed of the 200-500 vs. the 400?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2007, 1:35 PM   #19
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
what do the charts say about focus speed of the 200-500 vs. the 400?
Very true, but then I've already covered that earlier:
NHL wrote:
Quote:
The only negative is this lens does not come with USM/HSM, but going by her posted pictures I don't believe she'll benefit much from the ultrasonic focusing...
Just as Photozone mentioned nothing about the reduction in speed when using a 1.4x (either on the 70-200 or eventually the 400 when anyone needs more reach). The Tamron has the added benefit of being a zoom and then a longer 500mm tele without a need for TC!

-> Weight wise (which is the main advantage of the 400 over other lenses), the Tamron is actually slightly lighter (1237g vs 1250g)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 2:01 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
We're just splitting hair between the Tamron 200-500 and the EF-400 L according to photozone MTF's resolution @400mm:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

Canon EF 400mm f/5.6 L
@ 400mm F/5.6 F/8 F11
Center 1657 1767 1768
Border 1655 1767 1738

Tamron 200-500
@ 400mm F/5.6 F/8 F/11
Center 1651.5 1749 1730.5
Border 1631.5 1711 1695
Quote:
I have done quite a bit of research since my original post and came to the conclusion that the 400 prime would suit my needs for birds in flight (fast auto focus) and the kind of wildlife I shoot. I had been getting many people suggest the Canon 100-400 IS but in my opinion Id be shooting at 400m most of the time anyway and I do not think the 100-400at 400 is anywhere near as good as the prime. Apart from that it would cost $500 Aust more to purchase. I'm told that I will miss the IS but I have never had it and if I can't manage to handhold this lens I have tripods and a monopod if need be. I can always go to the zoom later if I really need to. The Tamron was also high on my list as was the sigma 50-500 but the sigma seems a very heavy lens for me to deal with. Now my husband wants to get a sigma 50-500 or something in the 500m range so I will have the use of his lens when he finally gets it. For now I'm looking forward to testing my skills out with the prime. Just waiting for my next payday (we only get paid monthly) when finally I will be able to get the cash together which is mid September and it seems to be taking forever








aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 PM.