tamron70-200mm f2.8 vs canon 200mm f2.8 prime

[drewd40]

i need a fast telephoto as i shoot mainly wildlife. im looking to spend less than $1000 this leaves me with three options the sigma 70-200mm f2.8, the tamron 70-200mm f2.8, and the canon 200mm f2.8 prime. ive looked at the sigma and decided i did not like the optics. i hear the tamron af motor is a bit noisy and tends to hunt in low light but it is optically good. i currently have no zooms but 3 prime lenses so should i deal with the tamron motor or suck it up and get another prime (canon 200mm f2.8)to have the usm?

 

[Destin]

Just out of curiosity, what don't you like about the optics of the sigma? I've been shooting sports with one for almost 2 years and I absolutely love it.

 

[Dao]

From what I read, the corner performance of the Sigma version is not as good as the others. However, corner sharpness may not be important for a lot of shooters especially when used in portrait shots where background maybe out of focus already.

 

[drewd40]

it was a little unsharp and i find my self shooting many high contrast subjects such as egrets and shore birds where there was a bit too much color fringing from it for me but i really dont want to make this into a discussion about that lens

 

[Destin]

it was a little unsharp and i find my self shooting many high contrast subjects such as egrets and shore birds where there was a bit too much color fringing from it for me but i really dont want to make this into a discussion about that lens

that's fine, I was just curious.

All I'm saying is that I've shot over 200,000 photos with it, it's held up insanely well. And I shoot alot of backlit subjects too (motocross riders flying through the air) and the color fringing has never been an issue. Maybe I just got a good copy.

But I wouldn't count it out if I were you, it's better built than the tokina version by a long shot, and definitely sharper in the research I did. The other thing, is that the tokina's AF motor is sloowwwwww compared to the sigma. I'm not saying you should get the sigma; that canon looks like a really nice little lens. But almost everyone in the industry reccomends the sigma over the tamron.

I won't post examples here but if you want to see literally thousands of photos taken with the sigma, almost all of my photos on Destin Danser Photography -- WNY Sports and Event Coverage -- in the sporting events section were taken with it.

 

[drewd40]

thanks i did look at some of your motocross pictures and they are amazing are these with or without post processing

 

[bratkinson]

For $999, you can get a good used Canon 70-200 f4 L lens at Adorama. I'm sure there's other good deals on used Canon glass online. I've been very successful getting used L glass online. But it pays to look carefully at the pictures and the sellers used-equipment rating of the lens. Deal with reputable, known sellers and you won't get burned.

 

[drewd40]

well i can do without IS but i do need f2.8 capability

 

[Overread]

If you are shooting mainly wildlife you're aiming for the wrong lenses. Wildlife photography starts at 300mm and in an ideal world you always want longer. I don't know the US market all that well for prices; but I would strongly suggest looking at options (even zooms) that can push to the 300mm end or longer for what you intend to do.

200mm can work, but you've got to get much closer to your subjects to get the shot; of course all that is debatable depending on your level of skill and comfort at being able to get to the wildlife (or to bring it closer to yourself).

 

[Destin]

thanks i did look at some of your motocross pictures and they are amazing are these with or without post processing

They are post processed but there is no CA correction applied and very minimal sharpening.

 

[drewd40]

i still need a lens in this range for things like indoor sports and the times i can get animals close to me i really just want opinions on a 200mm 2.8 prime with usm or a zoom with a noisy af motor that also has 2.8 ability

 

[Destin]

i still need a lens in this range for things like indoor sports and the times i can get animals close to me i really just want opinions on a 200mm 2.8 prime with usm or a zoom with a noisy af motor that also has 2.8 ability

Well as has been stated you can get a used canon 70-200 under $1,000, so I'd go that route and get the best of both worlds.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

I sometimes favor primes if in the standard focal range, for telephotos though I don't think you can beat a zoom lens. For a start the only reason, I use a telephoto is because I can't get closer. The flexibility of a telephoto zoom is great for composition when shooting from long distance!

 

[Destin]

I sometimes favor primes if in the standard focal range, for telephotos though I don't think you can beat a zoom lens. For a start the only reason, I use a telephoto is because I can't get closer. The flexibility of a telephoto zoom is great for composition when shooting from long distance!

Well for a good true telephoto a prime is really the only option once you get beyond 200mm, unless you want a Sigma 120-300

 

[Nikon_Josh]

I sometimes favor primes if in the standard focal range, for telephotos though I don't think you can beat a zoom lens. For a start the only reason, I use a telephoto is because I can't get closer. The flexibility of a telephoto zoom is great for composition when shooting from long distance!

Well for a good true telephoto a prime is really the only option once you get beyond 200mm, unless you want a Sigma 120-300

Good point, I guess it comes down to how much you value... quality VS flexibility. I agree for great quality past 200mm you will most likely want a prime, but if it was the choice between a 200mm or a 70-200 zoom, I would pick the zoom every time myself as the 70-200mm zooms are so damn good and offer so much flexibility.

If I was wanting to shoot at 300mm most of the time and it was a choice between a 300mm prime or a 70-300 then I would pick the prime, due to the faster aperture and much improved optical quality.