Tamron sp AF70-200mm F/2.8

[optic79]

Tamron has released a new lens, the AF70-200mm F/2.8. I have had difficulty finding reviews for this lens and I would like to know if anyone has had any experience with it, or know of any websites where a review has been completed.
What I know: The lens is pretty light for having a constant 2.8 aperture through out it's range (39.2 oz), It has a minimum focus distance of .95 meters yielding a maximum magnification ratio of 1:3.1, the lens comes with a flower shaped hood and detachable tripod grip ring, and the lens compensates for lateral and on-axis chromatic aberrations with three low dispersion elements.

I am in the market for an affordable tellephoto lens. I had considered this lens with a 1.4X telleconverter. I have a lens in the range of 24-105mm so I initially wanted a lens in the 100-300 or 400 range but there are few lenses in this range that I know of to choose from. The Sigma 100-300 F/4 has good reviews but is slightly out of my price range, The Canon 100-300 F/4.5-5.6 has not received good reviews, and the Canon 100-400 F/4.5-5.6 L has been well reviewed but is also out of my price range.
The other lens I am considering is the Canon 70-300 F/4-5.6 USM IS, it is not as fast as the Tamron but it has an extra 100 mm on the long end, and it has Image Stabilization. However, I have a Canon 24-105 F/4 USM IS L and I have not really noticed the benefits that IS technology is supposed to bring.

I would be interested in hearing about any experience, or knowledge that the forum has in relation to any of the many tellephoto lenses I have listed.

Thanks in advance

 

[Tiberius47]

I'm looking at the Tammy as well. I prefer the faster aperture to image stabilisation, because the tammy gives you a full two stops extra shutter speed due to the faster aperture. So you get two stops more shutter, as well as a wider aperture if you want/need it.

 

[optic79]

I once owned the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and thought it was an awesome lens, unfortunately it was stolen. I am hoping that the 70-200 will be a repeat of the 17-50 where great quality came at a much reduced price compared to it's Canon competitors.
I had considered the Canon 70-200 F/4 but I think 200mm will not be enough reach and I will be investing in 1.4x telleconverter. In that case it would be nice to start out at 2.8 aperture rather than F/4.

 

[NateWagner]

one thing that I will say is that as the focal length gets longer you will notice the IS more and more. at 24 the difference is somewhat negligible (not entirely, but somewhat). However, nearing towards 200-300 the IS is much more useful. I wouldn't plan on being able to shoot anything under 1/200 hand held. The IS may allow it to be shot lower, but it will have to, cause you're looking at a slower aperature.

Another lens to look into is the Sigma 70-200, which also has the HSM.