Jump to content

Image quality of Tamron 80-210 f/3.8-4, 70-210 f/3.8-4, and 70-210 f/3.5 SP?


h._wu

Recommended Posts

I'm thinking about a zoom tele lens for landscape and possibly for

portrait. I guess I can live with manual focus to save some money.

There are 3 Tamron lenses (used, with adapt-all mount) that look

promising:

80-210 f/3.8-4

70-210 f/3.8-4

70-210 f/3.5 SP

 

Does anyone have experience with these lenses? How good is the image

quality of each one of them? How do they compare to Canon 75-300

f/4-5.6? Btw, my budget is $200. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do the lenses come with, or do you have, the Tamron Adaptall mount for EOS? The adapters are very rare, and expensive (I've seen them go for $100) when used ones occasionally pop up.<p>Some people have used an Adaptall-M42 adapter plus added an M42-EOS adapter to mount Adaptall lenses on Canon bodies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have used the 70-210 3.8/4 and have the 70-210/3.5; i've used them both on manual bodies only.

 

the variable aperture version is two-touch, and is very sharp with good contrast. it also focuses down to about 15cm (or somesuch very close distance), up to 1:2 lifesize. 58mm filter size.

 

i haven't actually used the 3.5 yet; i bought it because i prefer one-touch for this range, and the fixed aperture appealed to me. it's slightly shorter but fatter than the 3.8/4, and doesn't focus as close (down to 1:4 if i remember correctly). 62mm filter size.

 

both models have integrated lens hoods (of different designs) and handle well. as i say i haven't got any shots with the 3.5 yet, though i've heard it's just as sharp as the 3.8/4 but with less nice bokeh, if that matters to you.

 

incidentally the 35-80 2.8/3.8 is also very good, and also focuses down to 1:2.5 IIRC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andrew,

 

How will a 50 help Wu. He is looking for a TELEPHOTO lens. Wu, the Canon 80-200 F4.5-4.5 zooms are a very good value for the money, and are small and light. At the short end they are very sharp (and slow) so backround blur would be a problem. On the long end if you stop down to F11 you will get great pictures. As always, tripods help IMMENSLY with these types of lenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all for your suggestions. Actually I do have a 50 f/1.8 (beside the 28-80 kit lens), and really love it...

 

I was asking about these Tamrons because I saw them on B&H catelog, which fell into my budget. As a beginner and definitely an amateur later, it's hard for me to justify a bigger budget, particularly for a tele, which I probably don't use that much...

 

From the review on this site, Canon 80-200 sounds pretty bad (as good as my kit lens, I guess). How does it really compare to a 75-300 in terms of image quality? The latter (non-IS) is still within my budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't used the 75-300 or 90-300 lenses, but I have owned the 100-300 USM and it's a

decent lens. It isn't really too much more than the 75-300, and is a whole lot nicer to use.

 

Otherwise get the EF 135mm f/2.8 SF lens. I recently sold my 70-200 f/4L because I used

the 135 f/2.8 instead 97% of the time. It really is an absolute gem, and shouldn't be left

out of consideration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

The Tamron 80-210mm from the 80s is still a decent lens. Check out the adaptall site which reviews the different models.

 

I just bought a focus-confirm adapter to use it with my 20D and it works quite well. If only all my old lenses could be used on the 20D!<div>00L3GO-36399284.jpg.41ff4f4c648198868cbfa24723f17fb3.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...