In fact this is not a question, but rather a review of a new lens that many people are interested in. I tested it on two type of images - a black and white graphical painting containing lots of tiny details and very close narrow lines under different angles spread all over the picture and a colorful graphical painting. Obviously the tests are not strictly professional, but can give quite reasonable feeling. I did the same tests with Canon 70-200 f/4.0 L USM lens. Even though they have different focal lengths, but comparison with one of the best zoom lenses gave me a reasonable ground for comparisons.
So, here are my conclusions. I don?t want to repeat the characteristics of the lens, which could be read on www.tamron.com.
1. The lens made quality is excellent. Even though it is plastic, it feels like a highest quality pro lens. All rings function perfectly.
2. It is lightweight.
3. The filter size is 67mm; these filters are quite cheap.
4. The auto focus works perfectly at all focal lengths. It is quite fast and very accurate; no front-, back-focusing. It is not noisy, but is not as silent as Canon USMs.
5. It is soft at 2.8 at all focal lengths, but not softer than Canon 70-200 f/4.0 L lens at 4.0. The sharpness improves at 4.0 and becomes very sharp at 5.6. The highest sharpness is detected at 8.0. At its best, it is almost as sharp as above-mentioned Canon lens. Not exactly - almost. However, the difference is very minor. The sharpness is even at the center and at the corners, whereas the Canon lens I compared with was very soft in the left lower corner.
6. I noticed no flare.
7. The colors are a little bit on the cool side. The Canon lens way strictly neutral.
Check attached zip file. It contains two JPG files. One is ttaken with Tamron at 8.0, the other - with Canon again at 8.0.
That is it. I hope that this may help others to make a selection.
|
