Tamron 200-400/5.6 LD - good?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by 1qa2ws, Apr 11, 2005.

  1. 1qa2ws

    1qa2ws Guest

    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
     
    1qa2ws, Apr 11, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. 1qa2ws

    JohnR66 Guest

    >1qa2ws" <> wrote in message
    >news:d3ehum$ipo$...
    > 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
     
    JohnR66, Apr 12, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. 1qa2ws

    1qa2ws Guest

    "JohnR66" <> wrote in message
    news:GXE6e.561571$...
    > >1qa2ws" <> wrote in message
    > >news:d3ehum$ipo$...
    >> 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
     
    1qa2ws, Apr 12, 2005
    #3
  4. "1qa2ws" <> wrote in message
    news:d3f877$ail$...
    >
    > "JohnR66" <> wrote in message
    > news:GXE6e.561571$...
    > > >1qa2ws" <> wrote in message
    > > >news:d3ehum$ipo$...
    > >> 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.
     
    Steve Gavette, Apr 12, 2005
    #4
  5. 1qa2ws

    1qa2ws Guest

    "Steve Gavette" <.4me> wrote in message
    news:AdI6e.6339$%c1.1118@fed1read05...
    >
    > "1qa2ws" <> wrote in message
    > news:d3f877$ail$...
    >>
    >> "JohnR66" <> wrote in message
    >> news:GXE6e.561571$...
    >> > >1qa2ws" <> wrote in message
    >> > >news:d3ehum$ipo$...
    >> >> 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
     
    1qa2ws, Apr 12, 2005
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jerry
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    3,265
    Jerry
    Oct 9, 2003
  2. Melissa

    Minolta 650si & Tamron AF Aspherical LD 28-200

    Melissa, Dec 18, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,297
    Melissa
    Dec 19, 2003
  3. Antti Heiskanen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    420
    Antti Heiskanen
    May 18, 2004
  4. Bill Tuthill

    Tamron 18-200 vs Sigma 18-125 & 18-200

    Bill Tuthill, Aug 29, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,659
    Bill Tuthill
    Sep 1, 2005
  5. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Tamron 75-300 Vs Tamron 70-300

    Larry R Harrison Jr, Sep 5, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    587
    Bill Tuthill
    Sep 6, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page