Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Tamron 200-400/5.6 LD - good?

Reply
Thread Tools

Tamron 200-400/5.6 LD - good?

 
 
1qa2ws
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-11-2005
Is this lens good for dSLR? I found that some models have IF in description?
Is it different lens? I'm planning to buy an used one, so I don't know what
the difference is.

1qa2ws


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
JohnR66
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-12-2005
>1qa2ws" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:d3ehum$ipo$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Is this lens good for dSLR? I found that some models have IF in
> description? Is it different lens? I'm planning to buy an used one, so I
> don't know what the difference is.
>
> 1qa2ws
>

I owned this lens when it came out in '95 (or so). As with many super tele
zooms, it is soft at the long end and shows some color fringing near the
edges. I was dissapointed with it and sold mine. I bought a Tokina 400mm
AT-X APO to replace it. Much better. I would recommend getting a 75-300 zoom
and a fixed focal length 400mm. The 75-300 is light and easy to hand and the
400mm lens will perform better at wide apertures where it is needed.
John


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
1qa2ws
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-12-2005

"JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:GXE6e.561571$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >1qa2ws" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:d3ehum$ipo$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Is this lens good for dSLR? I found that some models have IF in
>> description? Is it different lens? I'm planning to buy an used one, so I
>> don't know what the difference is.
>>
>> 1qa2ws
>>

> I owned this lens when it came out in '95 (or so). As with many super tele
> zooms, it is soft at the long end and shows some color fringing near the
> edges. I was dissapointed with it and sold mine. I bought a Tokina 400mm
> AT-X APO to replace it. Much better. I would recommend getting a 75-300
> zoom and a fixed focal length 400mm. The 75-300 is light and easy to hand
> and the 400mm lens will perform better at wide apertures where it is
> needed.
> John

Because there is crop factor i dSLR, the color fringing near the edges can
not occur, maybe? Is there any difference between 200-400/5.6 LD (IF) and
200-400/5.6 LD? Or they are the same lenses?

1qa2ws


 
Reply With Quote
 
Steve Gavette
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-12-2005

"1qa2ws" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:d3f877$ail$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:GXE6e.561571$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > >1qa2ws" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > >news:d3ehum$ipo$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Is this lens good for dSLR? I found that some models have IF in
> >> description? Is it different lens? I'm planning to buy an used one, so

I
> >> don't know what the difference is.
> >>
> >> 1qa2ws
> >>

> > I owned this lens when it came out in '95 (or so). As with many super

tele
> > zooms, it is soft at the long end and shows some color fringing near the
> > edges. I was dissapointed with it and sold mine. I bought a Tokina 400mm
> > AT-X APO to replace it. Much better. I would recommend getting a 75-300
> > zoom and a fixed focal length 400mm. The 75-300 is light and easy to

hand
> > and the 400mm lens will perform better at wide apertures where it is
> > needed.
> > John

> Because there is crop factor i dSLR, the color fringing near the edges can
> not occur, maybe? Is there any difference between 200-400/5.6 LD (IF) and
> 200-400/5.6 LD? Or they are the same lenses?


AFAIK, all were internal focus (IF). As was mentioned, it can be a bit soft
at the outer extreme. I never noticed any fringing, but I didn't use it that
much. I ended up getting a fixed 300 and a teleconvertor if I needed more. I
still have the 200-400 with caps and original box. I was going to put it on
EBay, but haven't gotten around to it. If you're interested in it, send an
email. You should see if you can look at one in a local store to see if you
like it. BTW, you didn't mention camera, and I don't know if they made
different versions. This one is Nikon mount.


 
Reply With Quote
 
1qa2ws
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-12-2005

"Steve Gavette" <(E-Mail Removed).4me> wrote in message
news:AdI6e.6339$%c1.1118@fed1read05...
>
> "1qa2ws" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:d3f877$ail$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> "JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:GXE6e.561571$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > >1qa2ws" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> > >news:d3ehum$ipo$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> Is this lens good for dSLR? I found that some models have IF in
>> >> description? Is it different lens? I'm planning to buy an used one, so

> I
>> >> don't know what the difference is.
>> >>
>> >> 1qa2ws
>> >>
>> > I owned this lens when it came out in '95 (or so). As with many super

> tele
>> > zooms, it is soft at the long end and shows some color fringing near
>> > the
>> > edges. I was dissapointed with it and sold mine. I bought a Tokina
>> > 400mm
>> > AT-X APO to replace it. Much better. I would recommend getting a 75-300
>> > zoom and a fixed focal length 400mm. The 75-300 is light and easy to

> hand
>> > and the 400mm lens will perform better at wide apertures where it is
>> > needed.
>> > John

>> Because there is crop factor i dSLR, the color fringing near the edges
>> can
>> not occur, maybe? Is there any difference between 200-400/5.6 LD (IF) and
>> 200-400/5.6 LD? Or they are the same lenses?

>
> AFAIK, all were internal focus (IF). As was mentioned, it can be a bit
> soft
> at the outer extreme. I never noticed any fringing, but I didn't use it
> that
> much. I ended up getting a fixed 300 and a teleconvertor if I needed more.
> I
> still have the 200-400 with caps and original box. I was going to put it
> on
> EBay, but haven't gotten around to it. If you're interested in it, send an
> email. You should see if you can look at one in a local store to see if
> you
> like it. BTW, you didn't mention camera, and I don't know if they made
> different versions. This one is Nikon mount.
>

I have Maxxum 7d, thanks

1qa2sw


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tamron 75-300 Vs Tamron 70-300 Larry R Harrison Jr Digital Photography 1 09-06-2005 06:14 PM
Tamron 24-135 Issue Ron Marino Digital Photography 1 08-08-2003 05:13 PM
Re: Tamron sp 90 1:1 macro AArDvarK Digital Photography 0 07-23-2003 02:46 PM
Tamron sp 90 f2/8 macro Eyron Digital Photography 1 07-18-2003 02:13 PM
canon 10d and Tamron AF28-300mm Ultra Zoom F/3.5-6.3 XR Aspherical [IF] MACRO Tomash Bednarz Digital Photography 21 07-16-2003 04:05 AM



Advertisments