Taking the Tammy 70-200mm for a spin

jboyde · 07-30-2010, 11:33 AM

I decided to rent the lens thru camerapntrs.com/t/TUJGRktHSkJHRkpISUVCRkpOSkVN?url=lensrentals.com and it came today. This thing is frickin' huge and dwarfs my K-7 more than I thought was possible!

I'm using it tomorrow for a small concert shoot but I wanted to try it out first. I can really say that the lens focuses fast and is inherently sharp. There are smooth gradations and it looks like the tones stay even.

I put up two test shots to gauge who it dealt with contrast and muted colors as well as sharpness. I'd say this is a winner.
Btw, these are wide open (2.8) shots.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Last edited by jboyde; 07-30-2010 at 11:34 AM. Reason: more info

Jodokast96 · 07-30-2010, 12:39 PM

What focal length is that at? If it's 200mm that's an extremely good copy, and quite honestly, I'd inquire about applying your rental fee towards purchasing it.

**jpzk** · 07-30-2010, 12:40 PM

JBoyde:

I too own the Sigma 70-200 and YES: it is one big lens!

My DA*300/4 looks quite small compared to it.

The Tammy is very contrasty and renders colours beautifully too. Agreed that it also focuses fast.

Are you going to keep that lens? Just asking ... curious.

Cheers.

JP

jboyde · 07-30-2010, 12:46 PM

@jodokast: that is at 200mm wide open at its closest range for focus (3.1 ft). All I did was use a little clarity in Lightroom, that was it.

@jpzk: I'll see how it goes tomorrow during the concert shoot but I do like this lens! My next try will be the Pentax 50-135, buuuuuut I know that I have an option to buy lenses that are rented. I have to see if the rental goes towards cost like Jodokast said.

SMPhoto · 07-30-2010, 01:46 PM

I rented the Tammy as well, a couple months ago. It wasn't the smartest move considering my only body is a K2000.

I was afraid the Tammy was going to break my lens mount off (never mind breaking my back) when I was carrying it around town!

But it definitely has great potential. Looks like you got an excellent copy, sadly mine was exceedingly soft at 200mm @ f/2.8.

Have fun!

**Ash** · 07-30-2010, 02:10 PM

Brilliant result. Definitely a good copy.
This would make a positive contribution to the wide open results from the Tamron 70-200 on my thread and Jay's thread here.

Jodokast96 · 07-30-2010, 02:14 PM

Absolutely they will apply it to the cost. I was happy with my copy until I saw this.

jboyde · 07-30-2010, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Brilliant result. Definitely a good copy.
This would make a positive contribution to the wide open results from the Tamron 70-200 on my thread and Jay's thread here.

Please feel free.

SpecialK · 07-30-2010, 02:21 PM

I have found that the gross tonnage of the Tamron actually makes it more stable when hand-held due to inertia. The lighter xx-300 zooms seems to wobble around more - one of the reasons I got the grip (which did not really help that issue).

A monopod will be your friend if it is not already.

jboyde · 07-30-2010, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

I have found that the gross tonnage of the Tamron actually makes it more stable when hand-held due to inertia. The lighter xx-300 zooms seems to wobble around more - one of the reasons I got the grip (which did not really help that issue).

A monopod will be your friend if it is not already.

Youre not kidding. The bottle pictures are handheld at 1/60 sec! I'd think that I wouldnt get anything sharp under 1/160 so I think you have a point.

**Ash** · 07-30-2010, 02:36 PM - **1 Like**

Technique handholding matters too - I've found with most of the weight supported by the left hand on the underside of the lens, there's much more stability, and of course reduced stress on the mount.

Raybo · 07-30-2010, 06:08 PM

I'm going to have to get my Tammy out of the closet, to be honest I haven't used it much.

Ray

PS I'll post my results when I do use it more.

jboyde · 07-30-2010, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by Raybo

I'm going to have to get my Tammy out of the closet, to be honest I haven't used it much.

Ray

PS I'll post my results when I do use it more.

Closet??!

BLASPHEMY!!

Ecaterin · 07-30-2010, 11:04 PM

Whew, you got a winner there! I think yours is sharper wide open than mine by a bit

I'm really impressed with this lens, that's for sure. Just gorgeous shots from it

I have, however, ordered a monopod - oh my aching wrists!

Some of my tests:

200mm 2.8

200mm f/5 1/60th, a bit of hand-shake on this one I'm sure

200mm 4.5

Raybo · 07-30-2010, 11:13 PM

Originally posted by jboyde

Closet??!

BLASPHEMY!!

I know!

I have a few other lenses I need to dust off.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Streets Took Ze Old Film Out For A Spin	dima	Post Your Photos!	2	11-05-2009 10:08 PM
Took the Bigma out for a spin	skinja	Post Your Photos!	5	07-20-2009 08:39 AM
Spin Cycle	penolta	Monthly Photo Contests	0	04-26-2009 04:19 PM
New 1.4 converter out for a bit of a spin.	metroeloise	Post Your Photos!	3	02-22-2009 12:24 PM
Samsung spin off camera division	Livewireshock	Pentax News and Rumors	1	11-08-2008 11:11 PM

07-30-2010, 12:39 PM	#2
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	What focal length is that at? If it's 200mm that's an extremely good copy, and quite honestly, I'd inquire about applying your rental fee towards purchasing it.

07-30-2010, 12:40 PM	#3
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	JBoyde: I too own the Sigma 70-200 and YES: it is one big lens! My DA*300/4 looks quite small compared to it. The Tammy is very contrasty and renders colours beautifully too. Agreed that it also focuses fast. Are you going to keep that lens? Just asking ... curious. Cheers. JP

07-30-2010, 12:46 PM	#4
jboyde Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: New York Posts: 328 Original Poster	@jodokast: that is at 200mm wide open at its closest range for focus (3.1 ft). All I did was use a little clarity in Lightroom, that was it. @jpzk: I'll see how it goes tomorrow during the concert shoot but I do like this lens! My next try will be the Pentax 50-135, buuuuuut I know that I have an option to buy lenses that are rented. I have to see if the rental goes towards cost like Jodokast said.

07-30-2010, 01:46 PM	#5
SMPhoto Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Gallery Posts: 185	I rented the Tammy as well, a couple months ago. It wasn't the smartest move considering my only body is a K2000. I was afraid the Tammy was going to break my lens mount off (never mind breaking my back) when I was carrying it around town! But it definitely has great potential. Looks like you got an excellent copy, sadly mine was exceedingly soft at 200mm @ f/2.8. Have fun!

07-30-2010, 02:10 PM	#6
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Brilliant result. Definitely a good copy. This would make a positive contribution to the wide open results from the Tamron 70-200 on my thread and Jay's thread here.

07-30-2010, 02:14 PM	#7
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	Absolutely they will apply it to the cost. I was happy with my copy until I saw this.

07-30-2010, 02:18 PM	#8
jboyde Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: New York Posts: 328 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ash Brilliant result. Definitely a good copy. This would make a positive contribution to the wide open results from the Tamron 70-200 on my thread and Jay's thread here. Please feel free.

07-30-2010, 02:21 PM	#9
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	I have found that the gross tonnage of the Tamron actually makes it more stable when hand-held due to inertia. The lighter xx-300 zooms seems to wobble around more - one of the reasons I got the grip (which did not really help that issue). A monopod will be your friend if it is not already.

07-30-2010, 02:32 PM	#10
jboyde Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: New York Posts: 328 Original Poster	Originally posted by SpecialK I have found that the gross tonnage of the Tamron actually makes it more stable when hand-held due to inertia. The lighter xx-300 zooms seems to wobble around more - one of the reasons I got the grip (which did not really help that issue). A monopod will be your friend if it is not already. Youre not kidding. The bottle pictures are handheld at 1/60 sec! I'd think that I wouldnt get anything sharp under 1/160 so I think you have a point.

07-30-2010, 02:36 PM - 1 Like	#11
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Technique handholding matters too - I've found with most of the weight supported by the left hand on the underside of the lens, there's much more stability, and of course reduced stress on the mount.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-30-2010, 06:08 PM	#12
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	I'm going to have to get my Tammy out of the closet, to be honest I haven't used it much. Ray PS I'll post my results when I do use it more.

07-30-2010, 10:41 PM	#13
jboyde Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: New York Posts: 328 Original Poster	Originally posted by Raybo I'm going to have to get my Tammy out of the closet, to be honest I haven't used it much. Ray PS I'll post my results when I do use it more. Closet??! BLASPHEMY!!

07-30-2010, 11:04 PM	#14
Ecaterin Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Seattle Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 723	Whew, you got a winner there! I think yours is sharper wide open than mine by a bit I'm really impressed with this lens, that's for sure. Just gorgeous shots from it I have, however, ordered a monopod - oh my aching wrists! Some of my tests: 200mm 2.8 200mm f/5 1/60th, a bit of hand-shake on this one I'm sure 200mm 4.5

07-30-2010, 11:13 PM	#15
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Originally posted by jboyde Closet??! BLASPHEMY!! I know! I have a few other lenses I need to dust off.