Tamron 70-200/2.8 Side by Side Comparrisons?
Okay you know who you are.... ahem.... don and sean! Would either or both of you mind posting your results comparing the lenses side by side on like 2.8 or some consistent setting outdoors or indoors? I'd like a 100% crop comparison with maybe the Sony 135/1.8 and Tamron 90/2.8 don if you don't mind :D. I'm just trying to get an idea of how well this thing performs. I'm almost 100% it will be my next lens! :D And sean, maybe you could compare it to the 70-300 side by side?
I'd really appreciate it.
If not, oh wells lol. There's always the paint bucket at dyxum I can look at!
Image evaluations ... cont'd
Well ... in response to your request ... for the images I have taken already ... the TAMRON SP AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO is as good or better than 90% of my lenses. It's biggest drawback is that it is not super fast to focus. But IQ-wise ... I have to say it is nearly as good as the SONY CZ 135mm f/1.8 ... at f/2.8. The 'CZ' is still a rocket focus, to be sure.
It was that test told me that the T70-200 was hot, to be sure.
The 90mm shot is really a toss-up, because it depends on the focusing distance. The TAMRON SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di LD MACRO can focus to about an inch in front of the lens ... super sharp ... while the 70-200mm f/2.8 requires about 38-inches, minimum.
Now, compared to the SONY 70-200mm f/2.8 G SSM, which requires nearly a full five-feet, that's a heck of a reduction in minimum focus distance (MFD). When shooting indoors ... that can be a real deal breaker.
I will try to shoot something, in short order ... with a really decent comparison test. Just realize that there is simply no way I am going to be able to shoot anything closer than three feet, for a true side-by-side.
BTW: the MFD of the CZ 135mm f/1.8 is about two feet.
While I would prefer waiting until the α700 returns from its repair, I will use the α100 to do these shots.
a couple quick shots ... just to see
Okay ... just to satisfy you quickly, here are some rather simple quick shots ... Manual setting ... to maintain exposure. They aren't pretty, but they expose short falls of the lens under similar conditions (f/2.8).
Subject: Cardboard box for LCD Monitor. (Distance = 7-feet)
Handheld - SSS "on"
Shutter Speed: 1/60 sec
Flash Compensation: +2EV (Shows defects better)
WB: Flash -1
Original CZ 135 f/1.8 lens shot (resized)
CZ 135 f/1.8 lens (100% crop)
T70-200 f/2.8 lens @ ~135mm (indicated) (100% crop)
Original T90 f/2.8 lens shot (resized)
T90 f/2.8 lens
T70-200 f/2.8 lens @ ~90mm (indicated)
I won't shoot against my TAMRON 70-300, because it does not have the 3 ADI contacts in the lens, so you would get different flash info to the pop-up between the two lenses. Also, shooting f/4 @ 90mm (f/4.5 @ 135mm) really tightens up the DOF, to where it is not in play.
Regarding the lenses evaluation ... confusing, ain't it? :confused:
Personally ... these results may not be as colorful as the "paint bucket", but they are exceptionally close to one another when you consider you are comparing prime lenses to a zoom lens.
If I didn't already have the primes, this lens would have made me think twice. Okay ... enough of that kind of thinking. I'm sure we ALL agree that you can never have enough glass. LOL :D
Nah, the 90mm MACRO lens does a completely different job ... so I would still have it. The CZ 135mm f/1.8, on the other hand ... I probably would waited a bit longer on getting. It is great for those fast sports shots ... but, you have to dig a lot deeper than the 70-200 f/2.8 costs you. You have to remember, I have waited a long time (over two years, when I found out that TAMRON was building it) to finally get my hands on the T70-200mm f/2.8. Heck, it's only a week or two old. :mad: My impatience has had a price ... let me tell ya.