p.1 #1 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
These are two great lenses yet dramatically different in their designs. Both very successful approaches once you determine your own priorities. Lots of advantages with either choice. Let's discuss:
In short, the Tamron 70-180 f2.8 impressively holds its own on sharpness and beats the original Sony. Superb. New Sony takes up quite a bit more room in bag but takes TCs and has stabilization. It has the ability to shoot more frames per second if you own an A1. It does weigh more but is manageable, absolutely.
If you shoot sports professionally, or very seriously, new Sony focus hit rate is extraordinary.
There are already early video comparisons out there comparing new Sony 70-200 II vs Tamron 70-180 there such as Manny Ortiz and the Northrups. Both reviews do lend some helpful insights although we all have our fave reviewers, or not! I don't agree with Northrups that the Tamron does not handle backlighting well. Mine does. Also, they say it's not good for sports. That's not true either. Depeniding on the body you are using, it won't be AS good as the new Sony but as a pro I can affirm it's a very capable lens.
If cost is a major deciding factor, at 40% the price of the new Sony 70-200 f2.8, the Tamron is a no-brainer.
Alas, as the owner of two 100-400s, (Sony and Sigma) . . . I'm likely to get the new Sony 70-200, primarily for its ability to take my 1.4TC and become a lightweight 280mm f4, (at last) or 420mm f4 in APS-C mode. But when needing to carry the lightest bag possible, I can't imagine giving up all of the great advantages of my beloved Tamron 70-180mm.
p.1 #2 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
Even though Marc Galer is an Ambassador for Sony, he is a straight shooter. His review gives you a good sense of better focus hit rate of new Sony with moving subjects. Since there is already a thread here on the new Sony 70-200, I hope this conversation will stay on topic in comparison to the Tamron.
p.1 #3 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
onthebeam wrote:
I'm likely to get the new Sony 70-200, primarily for its ability to take my 1.4TC and become a lightweight 300mm f4, (at last!) or 450mm f4 in APS-C mode.
That would be 450mm f6. If you use equivalent focal lengths, you need to pair them with equivalent apertures. Otherwise they just aren't equivalent.
p.1 #4 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
Daran wrote:
That would be 450mm f6. If you use equivalent focal lengths, you need to pair them with equivalent apertures. Otherwise they just aren't equivalent.
The Sony 70-200 f2.8 will yield a 420mm f4 equivalent in APS-C mode when paired with 1.4X TC. APS-C mode does not lose an f-stop like a 1.4X teleconverter. I suppose you may prefer to debate the pros and cons of APS-C mode yet I can tell you that like many pros, I value it greatly when shooting with my A7R4. Rather than a 61MP file, it still gives me a still very large 26MP file. The A1 will yield 21MP in APS-C mode. (Using this combo also affords a wonderful reach to 840mm with the Sony 100-400.)
p.1 #5 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
onthebeam wrote:
The Sony 70-200 f2.8 will yield a 420mm f4 equivalent in APS-C mode when paired with 1.4X TC. APS-C mode does not lose an f-stop like a 1.4X teleconverter.
That is a common misconception. A 420mm f4 equivalent lens *requires* a front aperture of 105mm diameter. Since 200 f2.8 has a front element of only about 72mm, it can not create equivalent images, no matter how you crop or what teleconverter you use.
p.1 #7 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
Not in real world use, Daran. If you have the ability to actually compare shots of your own, just take a look at the files. You might also want to take a look at the Colby Brown article.
As predicted just a handful of posts in, sure is hard to keep this thread on intended topic:
Tamron lens vs. Sony lens. Pros vs pros.
p.1 #8 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
onthebeam wrote:
Not in real world use, Daran. If you have the ability to actually compare shots of your own, just take a look at the files.
You are wrong. Please at least have a look at the dpreview article. It has "real world" samples. If you don't trust dpreview I can provide other links.
As predicted just a handful of posts in, sure is hard to keep this thread on intended topic:
Tamron lens vs. Sony lens. Pros vs pros.
I'm sorry I apparently derailed your anti-derailing thread. I do think getting facts straight is worth it, though. I guess you might even agree, after reading up on the subject.
p.1 #9 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
jbegis wrote:
Cropping does not effect f/#.
It does not affect the actual aperture fraction (aka f-number), just as it does not affect the actual focal length. If talking equivalence, it affects both. Please check out the dpreview link, it explains this better than I could.
p.1 #11 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
Maybe parking lot this by creating a new thread for discussion on that topic and link to that thread from here?
Daran wrote:
It does not affect the actual aperture fraction (aka f-number), just as it does not affect the actual focal length. If talking equivalence, it affects both. Please check out the dpreview link, it explains this better than I could.
p.1 #12 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
tsdevine wrote:
Maybe parking lot this by creating a new thread for discussion on that topic and link to that thread from here?
I only responded to the OP because he had his math wrong. This isn't rocket science. Just google lens equivalence if you wana know. If you can't be bothered, fine, I don't care, you don't have to talk about equivalence. Just stop claiming wrong numbers in a public forum.
p.1 #13 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
Back on topic. I believe all of the posted youtubers would choose the Sony over the Tamron and for good reason. At the same time I think the Tamron is the better choice for the majority of shooters (particularly non-professionals). Apparently the Tamron is sharp, cheaper, smaller and lighter. The GM is also sharp, but longer (FL), faster (AF) and has slightly better (IQ). So IMHO there can't be a universal winner, the choice should be due to how relevant one considers the pros and cons.
p.1 #14 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
I agree, for me also the distinction is rather clear:
* "pro features" : internal zoom, faster & more reliable AF, 30 FPS, OIS, TC, bigger, heavier, more expensive
p.1 #15 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
j4nu wrote:
...
* "pro features" : internal zoom, faster & more reliable AF, 30 FPS, OIS, TC, bigger, heavier, more expensive
I think TC capability is rather overrated. Gerald Undone has a section in his review where he shows the TC2.0 on the Sony. Good enough for video, maybe, but already somewhat degrades a 4K recording. Mostly useless for photography, IMHO.
p.1 #16 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
I have a Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8. I chose it over the Sony 70-200mm GM v1 because of size/weight, and the better image quality. I was not a fan of the first gen Sony. I use it primarily for portrait, events, and landscape. I have never been disappointed with the shooting experience, the IQ, or the results.
I do wish it had built in OSS. When shooting event style, I find I have to bump the ISO at times to make up for this. In such circumstances it is like I actually have a f/4 instead of an f/2.8. Still better IQ then the Sony 70-200 f/4.
I also wish there was a TC available. It looks like one would fit. Maybe some day....
I paid exactly $1000 for the lens with no sales tax. I had a VIP certificate for another $100 rebate so net cost only $900. I consider that a bargain for such a high quality, useful lens. I am very happy with the purchase.
The 15fps and hit rate are fine for the type of shooting I do with it. I have the Sony 100-400 for fast action.
When traveling to areas with good photographic opportunities I have a light, flexible, 3 lens kit that covers me from 15mm to 270mm(Crop mode), with very high IQ. The 70mm-180mm is a core piece of that kit.
At 3 times the price, and much more weight, I am not sure I would get better results with the new 70-200 Sony GII is this use case.
p.1 #17 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
Daran wrote:
I think TC capability is rather overrated. Gerald Undone has a section in his review where he shows the TC2.0 on the Sony. Good enough for video, maybe, but already somewhat degrades a 4K recording. Mostly useless for photography, IMHO.
I trust the opinions here and from what I've read 1.4x has pretty minimal impact on IQ, if any...
p.1 #19 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
j4nu wrote:
I trust the opinions here and from what I've read 1.4x has pretty minimal impact on IQ, if any...
Well, I have the 1.4x, did tons of tests on the 200-600G and hardly ever use it on my A1. That is for birding of both perched and flying birds where most shots need to be cropped in post, so more focal length would be very welcome. Similarly a friend of mine usually skips it on his A6600. Similarly arbitrage here apparently usually skips it on his A1. He does use it on his A9, though, which has a lower resolution and therefore doesn't require as high IQ from the lens.
p.1 #20 · Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II vs. Tamron 70-180: Pros vs. Pros:
Daran wrote:
Well, I have the 1.4x, did tons of tests on the 200-600G and hardly ever use it on my A1. That is for birding of both perched and flying birds where most shots need to be cropped in post, so more focal length would be very welcome. Similarly a friend of mine usually skips it on his A6600. Similarly arbitrage here apparently usually skips it on his A1. He does use it on his A9, though, which has a lower resolution and therefore doesn't require as high IQ from the lens.
Ok, maybe TCs are useless on A1. I was thinking of buying 1.4x one day and trying it on 100-400GM but in this case I might give it a rest...
)
.