RCicala wrote:
I got a few of the Tamron today and I will say clearly it won't compete on autofocus speed. Its a leisurely autofocusing lens. Even the original Canon 70-300 IS is quicker to autofocus. That's probably not a key point on this kind of lens, but its a point. The other thing is the Tamron VC does not have a panning mode, it fights you if you try to pan.
That's logical. It's a much cheaper lens so differences are expected.
RCicala wrote:
I'm now out of the Canon 70-300L so I can't do a head to head yet, but should have some more in next week.
10X. I'm sure we'd all be anxious to see the results.
Even if the new Tamron matches the L in terms of IQ the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well. In any case I still don't understand all the hating on this lens--it's certainly not for everyone.
M Vers wrote:
the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well.
This is undoubtedly very important for some. But I have to agree that the price seems too high.
I had a suspicion that this lens was going to replace the 100-400L. For a couple of years now, rumor has been circulating that a Mk2 was coming out. This never proved true. However, this looks like it just may happen - http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/10/ef-100-400-version-2-coming-cr2/
If the 70-300L is $1,600, I hate to see what the new 100-400 Mk2 is going to sell for.
Aaron D wrote:
This is undoubtedly very important for some. But I have to agree that the price seems to high.
I had a suspicion that this lens was going to replace the 100-400L. For a couple of years now, rumor has been circulating that a Mk2 was coming out. This never proved true. However, this looks like it just may happen - http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/10/ef-100-400-version-2-coming-cr2/
If the 70-300L is $1,600, I hate to see what the new 100-400 Mk2 is going to sell for.
I can't argue as to the cost of the lens, which is high--then again it is new and those who feel the absolute need for it will have to pay the price if they want it now. I think the cost of the lens has a lot to do with the introduction of higher density sensors, which essentially extend the lens' effective reach (which is why you see the 70-300L priced so close to the 100-400)--Just wait until we see other long lenses, especially those over 300mm. We'll see how long it remains where it is in terms of cost...it could very well drop considerably.
M Vers wrote:
Even if the new Tamron matches the L in terms of IQ the L still offers superior build (namely weather sealing) and I'd think* it would focus quicker/more accurately as well. In any case I still don't understand all the hating on this lens--it's certainly not for everyone.
Is build quality worth an extra $1,000+? Tamron usually makes pretty good lenses.
I think* most people are disappointed that Canon came out with yet another 70-300mm 4.0-5.6 lens (how many versions of these do they really need) while ignoring the aging 100-400mm lens or some others.
I think you get what you pay for in most cases assuming the manufacturer doesn't misrepresent his product. The price should be based on manufacturing cost and percieved value. I doubt the lens will be a dud. Tamron lenses are often packed with plastic elements and mostly plastic components. I admit they can be optically quite good. I think that build quality is everything, how long do you think the Tamron will last? Will it stand up to daily usage? The op has already stated not to expect the Tamron to be as good optically. So how much is excellence worth to you compared to mediocrity. How about the resale? If you are a casual user, the Tamron may be best for you. If you want quite possibly the best 70-300, buy the L. If you want a better price, there will be one on B&S next month or a rebate the month after.
You have to remember too that the 70-300L is being introduced when the US dollar is at an all time low. A couple years ago it may have been priced at $995.
I see pros with Tokina, Sigma or Tamron lenses all the time. Weddings, surfing events, publicity, press. Pros like to have money in their pockets, too, and if a Tammy does it for $1000 less, then that will be the chosen lens.
geniousc wrote:
Tamron lenses are often packed with plastic elements and mostly plastic components. I admit they can be optically quite good. I think that build quality is everything, how long do you think the Tamron will last? Will it stand up to daily usage?
gene
Well, Tamron warranty is what 5 or 6 years? Canon's warranty Yeah 1 year.
I have a Tamron 70-300 VC, it's a nice lens but after testing it, it underexposures by a stop, some other batches overexposure by a stop . Prone to CA open wide. I'm sending it to the dealer for a replacement.
Sorry to hear that, you're covered with the 6 year warranty though. IME I have had few if any 3rd party lenses that didn't include some agravating annoyance. Some had major problems like a Sigma 50 that I sent back 3 times and finally ended up returning.
and as no one actually likes the pouch canon will stop giving that as well 
!