Tamron 28-75 and Canon 70-200 4.0L

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

01/06/2006 01:38:26 AM · #1

I was just wondering; is the image quality of the Tamron 28-75 2.8 and the Canon 70-200 4.0 comparable at a common aperture and focal length? Such as 70mm and 4.0 or 5.6 or so.

If any owners of both lenses have some free time and wouldn't mind taking some comparison shots, that'd be cool.

Also, if the same subject was framed the same way with each lens at its maximum focal length and maximum aperture, how much of a difference in DOF would there be? (between 75mm @ 2.8 and 200mm @ 4.0)

And both of those lenses would focus more accurately and faster than the 18mm kit lens, right? I got to try out the Tamron lens in a camera store for a couple minutes, it seemed really solid and smooth and the focus seemed nice, but I didn't get to try it in low light or for action or anything.

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

01/06/2006 03:17:47 AM · #2

The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is a great lens and the Canon 70-200 4.0 L is as well.

I had the Canon 70-200mm 4.0L and I have tried out the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 and it will be my next lens.

To answer your first question you didn't define a distance so I'm going to say framed at 20' away and 100' away.

Focused on a subject 20' away.
Tamron 28-70mm f/2.8 @ 2.8
Near Focus Distance: 19.4'
Far Focus Distance: 20.7'
Focus Depth: 1.3'

Canon 70-200mm f/4.0L @ 4.0
Near Focus Distance: 19.9'
Far Focus Distance: 20.1'
Focus Depth: 0.2'

Focused on a subject 100' away.
Tamron 28-70mm f/2.8 @ 2.8
Near Focus Distance: 86.6'
Far Focus Distance: 117.8'
Focus Depth: 31.2'

Canon 70-200mm f/4.0L @ 4.0
Near Focus Distance: 97.0'
Far Focus Distance: 103.1'
Focus Depth: 6.1'

Both of these lens are far better than the 18mm kit lens.
-SDW

Message edited by author 2006-01-06 03:20:36.

01/06/2006 03:36:01 AM · #3

I take it that you're asking to see the same shot done at 70mm and, say, f/5.6 with each lens? I'll take a stab at that tomorrow if it is not raining.

Robt.

Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Canon

01/06/2006 01:34:37 PM · #4

Following pic shot with Canon 70-200mm f/4L and Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. Zoom was at 70mm on the Canon and 68mm on the Tamron (no marker showed 70 so I had to eyeball it). ISO 100, f/5.6, 1/15 second, tripod mounted (gloomy day here). All processed from RAW to the exact same parameters. Focus point was on the grille of the car just above the fog lamp. Full frame and 100%, 640-pixel crops.

Canon

Tamron

R.

yido

Canon EOS-5D

01/06/2006 03:50:52 PM · #5

looking at MTF charts at Photozone.de, it seems that Tamron at 75mm is shaper at same aperatures than the Canon 70-200 at 70mm.
//www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_2875_28/index.htm
//www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70200_4/index.htm

Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Canon

01/06/2006 09:08:51 PM · #6

Thanks for the info yido and southern_exposure, and thanks for going out and taking the photos Bear_music.

I guess the focus is a lot shallower cause of how long the 200mm is.. a 200mm 1.8 would be crazy.

Now just to wait until I have some money.. I think the 70-200mm 4.0L would be better than the 70-300 4-5.6IS since I want to shoot outdoor sports with it anyway, the subjects would be moving fast and I dont know if IS would work then.

yido

Canon EOS-5D

01/06/2006 09:37:39 PM · #7

for sports, people generally prefer more than 200mm. I think Sigma's 120-300 EX F2.8 is about ideal in reach and speed. However, it's 2000 bucks.

Since the 70-200 and the 70-300IS are similar in speed, I'd prefer the IS lens for the reach. Neither lens is fast enough for indoor sports. I'd say you need atleast f2.8 or lower.
The IS won't help you freeze motion, but it will help you with panning and camera shake though.

Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Canon

01/06/2006 10:45:54 PM · #8

What about BMX and motocross racing though? I think I might get more involved with BMX here this coming year, and if I don't ride I'd like to shoot some of the races (I think they are in the afternoon/evening, with decent light)

yido

Canon EOS-5D

01/07/2006 12:21:27 AM · #9

Outdoors? With sunlight, even near sunset, you probably can get by with using wide open at ISO 400 or so.

I still think the 70-300 maybe better for this as well for the reach and the IS will help with panning to blur the background and further show a sense of motion.

Look at this shot here:
//yido.smugmug.com/gallery/1079355/2/50265070
It was dark in the arena so I used ISO 400 at f2.8 and only managed a Tv of 1/80 sec at 200mm (260mm in FF equiv). If I had an IS lens, the subject would be sharper while the background would still be nice and blurred.

01/07/2006 01:12:05 AM · #10

How does the IS sensor know what parts to stabilise and what parts not to? Would multiple subjects confuse it?

I haven't searched much for photos of BMX racing, but this picture is kind of what I had in mind, but I'd like to be able to isolate the subject and blur the background..
//www.bmxultra.com/pictures/pictures/2002/victitles/2002vic069.jpg

Prof_Fate

01/07/2006 01:40:25 AM · #11

Originally posted by MadMan2k:

It does nothing to the subject, or subjects at all. This is why action shots might still be blurry.
IS/VR lenses have a lens element that is moveable by tiny electic motors. When the sensors in the lens sense movement of the lens itself (the phhotographer's movement, shake, breathing, etc) it moves this lens element to compensate and keep the image from looking blurred. On konica minolta they sensor itself is mobile in this way.

I have a 5 year old panasonic video camera with this technology in it, and it does work very nicely in that application.

01/08/2006 02:08:41 AM · #12

Ah, OK, thanks.

I found a photo that pretty much sums up what I want to do with whichever telephoto I get:
//www.istv.com/coppermine/albums/jack/falls-05/sunday/aba-falls-sun184.jpg

01/08/2006 02:17:05 AM · #13

Originally posted by MadMan2k:

Ah, OK, thanks.

I found a photo that pretty much sums up what I want to do with whichever telephoto I get:
//www.istv.com/coppermine/albums/jack/falls-05/sunday/aba-falls-sun184.jpg

That's 120mm, f/9, 1/320, ISO 100... A close look at the lighting on the bikes and the frontmost face suggests strongly there's a strobe or a very powerful bank of floods over to the right, also.

R.

Message edited by author 2006-01-08 02:21:35.

01/08/2006 02:31:22 AM · #14

A quick google search on the guys name gives a topic of his on fredmiranda:
//www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/327276

Looks like he has.. "Canon 1D Mark II, 24-70L, 70-200L, 500 f4, Bigma, 15mm fish, 550EX, Sunpak 120J's"

I wonder how well just available light would work for shots like that?

01/08/2006 02:54:37 AM · #15

That particular shot's totally backlit, not so well for that one. Without the strobe he'd have very little face detail.

R.

TrollMan

Fujifilm X-T4

Fujifilm XF 35mm f/1.4

01/08/2006 03:54:31 AM · #16

Originally posted by MadMan2k:

I use an EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS for these types of shots. The good thing with the Image Stabilization in Canon lenses (I can't comment about others) is that you can have two modes of IS:

Mode I: horizontal and vertical image stabilization
Mode II: only vertical image stabilization

So when you want to blur the background as you mentioned, you have the ability to goto mode II and pan without the image stabilizer trying to catch up.

Hope this helps,
Are

TrollMan

Fujifilm X-T4

Fujifilm XF 35mm f/1.4

01/08/2006 04:25:27 PM · #17

bump