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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 10, 2012, 11:07 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Electrolyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterP View Post
Tokina used to make a reasonable priced 80-400mm, don't think it had stabilization though.
Might have been dropped, have not seen them in a long while.

Not sure why the need for stabilization unless you are in low light, I can manage a 600mm hand-held if I set the shutter to 1/1000 (at least for a few minutes before my arms fall off)
Afaik, in terms of optics and consistency the Tokinas are very good lenses. Imho it's the best of all "generic" lenses manufacturers. Never heard about fluctuation in quality.

Yes, I plan to take pictures in low light.
Electrolyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 10, 2012, 11:35 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrolyte View Post
Imho it's the best of all "generic" lenses manufacturers.
Once again:

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
Everybody makes great lenses and not-so-great lenses.
Any attempt to classify all the products from any single manufacturer, as either superior or inferior to the products of its competitors is doomed to failure.
This is about the lens, not the lens manufacturer.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2012, 12:58 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Electrolyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 113
Default

I've tested both the Canon EF 70-300 IS USM and the Tamron 70-300 VC.

The Canon has a few problems I can't live with:
1-The front element rotates with zoom/focus, and the focus ring also rotates when AF.
2-No AF manual override... You have to activate the MF switch before .
3-The AF is a little bit slower than the Nikon 70-300 that I'm used to. I could live with it though.

It has some problems, but the image is decently sharp at 300mm f5.6, although it has some serious CA. Also, it focuses a little bit in front of the subject.

The Tamron also has a few problems:
1-The AF is seriously inaccurate (tested on both t2i and 60d).
2-The AF is kinda slow.

The Tamron is impressively sharp at almost all lengths, and the image stabilization is the best I've ever seen at 300mm.

The best low-price x-300mm zoom lens that I tested is the Nikon AF-S 70-300mm VR. It's only a bit soft at >250mm, even at f8.0 it's not very sharp, but overall It's the best imho. The combination of Tamron's stabilization and optics and Nikon's AF would be almost perfect. I suspect it would be somewhat pricier also.

Let's face the truth... I need a L-series .
Electrolyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2012, 6:49 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Ef 70-300l is usm to ef 100-400L is usm. They are in a different league.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2012, 7:10 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Electrolyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
Ef 70-300l is usm to ef 100-400L is usm. They are in a different league.
Nope, I was talking about the EF 70-300 Non-L.

It's very expensive to have a long reach with a DSLR... I think that's why superzooms are successful. You get bad high iso performance and autofocus. But they cost kinda 1/12 of a DSLR with lenses.
Electrolyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2012, 11:32 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

I know, but if iq is to rhen those are the 2 lenses you want, fast af, super sharp
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Apr 15, 2012 at 1:17 PM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 13, 2012, 6:38 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

The supertelephoto lenses from Sigma and Tamron aren't bad, and they're a lot cheaper than the Canon 100-400L. Take a look at what others have done with them in the Wildlife Photos forum.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 13, 2012, 3:51 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Electrolyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The supertelephoto lenses from Sigma and Tamron aren't bad, and they're a lot cheaper than the Canon 100-400L. Take a look at what others have done with them in the Wildlife Photos forum.
Don't know... I've read a lot of reviews that compare the Sigma 150-500 (or 80/120-400) and the Canon 100-400L and the Canon seems a way better. Of course they're lot cheaper, but I'd rather have less reach and better overall quality in this case. The problem is that pretty much every low-cost zoom lens is somewhat soft at the long end.
So basically, If I'm going low-cost with zoom lenses, I'll have sharp 200mm pics with a x-300mm, and sharp 300-400mm with a x-500mm.

Also, I have the feeling that Af at something smaller than f5.6 (even 1/3 stop smaller) has some serious problems, especially in lower-end bodies.

And I'm also kinda changing my mind towards the 300mm F4 L IS + 1.4x TC, instead the 100-400L... almost the same price, but I think the 300mm F4 is much faster and sharper. And the TC shoudn't degrade the quality that much. Also, I could buy the lens immediately and the TC laters.

Regards.
Electrolyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 13, 2012, 5:04 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

Did you look at the photos others have taken and posted in the Wildlife Photos forum?
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 13, 2012, 6:24 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Electrolyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
Did you look at the photos others have taken and posted in the Wildlife Photos forum?
Yep. I always look there for new stuff.
Electrolyte 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 10:13 AM.