Tamron/Sigma/Sony/Minolta 70-200mm F2.8 Shootout
A quick and dirty F2.8 full-frame telephoto zoom lens comparison for Alpha mount!
Click here for large version.
The big guns, left to right, arranged in order of MFD:
Minolta 80-200mm F2.8G HS APO, 1.8m MFD - Asyraf's copy
Sony 70-200mm F2.8G SSM, 1.2m MFD - Nic's copy
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG HSM Macro, 1.0m MFD - Sham's copy
Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 Macro, 0.95m MFD - shop copy
Sony Carl Zeiss 135mm F1.8, 0.72m MFD - my copy
I didn't bring my lens hood. :(
* MFD = Minimum Focus Distance
All tests done with a Sony Alpha 900 firmware Version 1.00. The A900 seems to make the Sony 70-200mm F2.8G SSM focus faster, subjectively, but at the same time it is hampered by the smaller AF sensor layout. Regardless, the AF assist sensors and the F2.8 dual-cross type center sensor should bring out the best in the worst conditions, namely an indoor flourescent-lit shopping mall!
We were time-limited; the shop was closing soon, and unfortunately we'd rarely ever get to see such a full combination of 70-200mm F2.8 lens ranges.
Settings - Standard Small JPG, DRO Off, ISO1600, F2.8 (or F1.8 on the Zeiss), AWB, Multi-segment metering, center spot AF, AF-C.
We did a comparison with a moving target, in this case a friend walking towards us. I attempted to keep the center spot AF point on the eye of the moving subject.
; <b>bad shots</b> meaning it was obvious that the lens didn't manage to keep focus and you'd want to delete that shot.<br><br><img src=)
** 14 shots on the Zeiss are not comparable because of the different start/stop points; I cannot measure this versus the other lenses because they don't have the same magnification so I can't measure the start/end points easily.
My Subjective Opinion
Click for larger view.)
Tamron at 200mm F2.8 1/125s ISO400. This is not a picture of me!
I will assure you that the Sigma at 200mm F2.8 and this close range (on the A900) will not give you this amount of sharpness. The Tamron without a doubt is good at 200mm F2.8 in the 1-2 meters range (estimated) where the Sigma falters.
My previous findings on the Sigma here.
The Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 and Minolta 80-200mm F2.8G HS APO, both being screw-drive lenses, let the A900 fire away more frames at the beginning of the walk. It focused more confidently. There was an obvious audible difference between the 5 FPS of screw-drives and the slower, more hesitant pauses between HSM/SSM lenses. Everybody noticed this.
Given the low sample rate I have here, I hope somebody out there can take this further especially on the 200mm end - the shop confines didn't allow for 200mm tracking. That said the test was very gruelling on the lenses as it is in poor flourescent lighting so I cannot imagine how it would fare at 200mm. I would imagine that all these lenses would do much better in a daylight drag race at 200mm!
Approaching the minimum focusing distance all lenses struggled mainly because of the A900's small AF sensor layout.
The Minolta 80-200mm F2.8G HS APO's MFD of 1.8 meters makes itself very apparent in the confines of a shop. Modern lenses do 1.2 meters at least which is great! The Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6G SSM is another excellent example, going 1.2 meters close too, a record for any lens that gets to 300mm! Of course, the Minolta 70-210mm F4 beercan has been focusing 1.1 meters close since 1985...
Of course, in the name of science, all tests should be done 3 times. But we didn't want to agitate the very nice shopkeeper who let us test this lens. And this was gonna be quick and dirty, not precision. I think a much more precise method would be with the camera on a tripod trying to track a (weighted) racecar with a bright contrasty plastic cone (for a flag) on a track, heading towards the camera in a straight line before turning off.
70-135-200mm comparison
I focused on the S of the Sony A700. Unfortunately this was not a tripod-mounted test!
Click for larger view.)
Left to right: 70mm, 135mm, 200mm all at F2.8
Top is Tamron, bottom is Sigma. It seems the Tamron has corrected for lateral chromatic aberration, or color 'bokeh'. It looks odd to me though since I'm so used to LCA and regard it as a natural property of lenses.
Click for larger view.)
Left to right: 70mm/80mm, 135mm, 200mm all at F2.8
Top is Sony, bottom is Minolta.
Click for larger view.)
Zeiss at 135mm F1.8.
Click for larger view.)
Left to right: 70mm, 135mm, 200mm all at F2.8
Top is Tamron, middle is Sigma, bottom is Sony.
Click for larger view.)
Zeiss at 135mm F1.8.
The Sigma and Tamron have much more obvious spherical aberration. I thought the Tamron was alright at 135mm and a heck lot better than the Sigma at 200mm and close focus (1-2 meters.) The Sigma has very obvious softening!
Stuff I Did Not Compare
Color - I was in flourescent lighting. :(
Bokeh - the shop people kept moving about so the background changed quite a bit as you can see.
Click here for large version.The big guns, left to right, arranged in order of MFD:
Minolta 80-200mm F2.8G HS APO, 1.8m MFD - Asyraf's copy
Sony 70-200mm F2.8G SSM, 1.2m MFD - Nic's copy
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG HSM Macro, 1.0m MFD - Sham's copy
Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 Macro, 0.95m MFD - shop copy
Sony Carl Zeiss 135mm F1.8, 0.72m MFD - my copy
I didn't bring my lens hood. :(
* MFD = Minimum Focus Distance
All tests done with a Sony Alpha 900 firmware Version 1.00. The A900 seems to make the Sony 70-200mm F2.8G SSM focus faster, subjectively, but at the same time it is hampered by the smaller AF sensor layout. Regardless, the AF assist sensors and the F2.8 dual-cross type center sensor should bring out the best in the worst conditions, namely an indoor flourescent-lit shopping mall!
We were time-limited; the shop was closing soon, and unfortunately we'd rarely ever get to see such a full combination of 70-200mm F2.8 lens ranges.
Settings - Standard Small JPG, DRO Off, ISO1600, F2.8 (or F1.8 on the Zeiss), AWB, Multi-segment metering, center spot AF, AF-C.
We did a comparison with a moving target, in this case a friend walking towards us. I attempted to keep the center spot AF point on the eye of the moving subject.
** 14 shots on the Zeiss are not comparable because of the different start/stop points; I cannot measure this versus the other lenses because they don't have the same magnification so I can't measure the start/end points easily.
My Subjective Opinion
Click for larger view.)Tamron at 200mm F2.8 1/125s ISO400. This is not a picture of me!
I will assure you that the Sigma at 200mm F2.8 and this close range (on the A900) will not give you this amount of sharpness. The Tamron without a doubt is good at 200mm F2.8 in the 1-2 meters range (estimated) where the Sigma falters.
My previous findings on the Sigma here.
The Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 and Minolta 80-200mm F2.8G HS APO, both being screw-drive lenses, let the A900 fire away more frames at the beginning of the walk. It focused more confidently. There was an obvious audible difference between the 5 FPS of screw-drives and the slower, more hesitant pauses between HSM/SSM lenses. Everybody noticed this.
Given the low sample rate I have here, I hope somebody out there can take this further especially on the 200mm end - the shop confines didn't allow for 200mm tracking. That said the test was very gruelling on the lenses as it is in poor flourescent lighting so I cannot imagine how it would fare at 200mm. I would imagine that all these lenses would do much better in a daylight drag race at 200mm!
Approaching the minimum focusing distance all lenses struggled mainly because of the A900's small AF sensor layout.
The Minolta 80-200mm F2.8G HS APO's MFD of 1.8 meters makes itself very apparent in the confines of a shop. Modern lenses do 1.2 meters at least which is great! The Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6G SSM is another excellent example, going 1.2 meters close too, a record for any lens that gets to 300mm! Of course, the Minolta 70-210mm F4 beercan has been focusing 1.1 meters close since 1985...
Of course, in the name of science, all tests should be done 3 times. But we didn't want to agitate the very nice shopkeeper who let us test this lens. And this was gonna be quick and dirty, not precision. I think a much more precise method would be with the camera on a tripod trying to track a (weighted) racecar with a bright contrasty plastic cone (for a flag) on a track, heading towards the camera in a straight line before turning off.
70-135-200mm comparison
I focused on the S of the Sony A700. Unfortunately this was not a tripod-mounted test!
Click for larger view.)Left to right: 70mm, 135mm, 200mm all at F2.8
Top is Tamron, bottom is Sigma. It seems the Tamron has corrected for lateral chromatic aberration, or color 'bokeh'. It looks odd to me though since I'm so used to LCA and regard it as a natural property of lenses.
Click for larger view.)Left to right: 70mm/80mm, 135mm, 200mm all at F2.8
Top is Sony, bottom is Minolta.
Click for larger view.)Zeiss at 135mm F1.8.
Click for larger view.)Left to right: 70mm, 135mm, 200mm all at F2.8
Top is Tamron, middle is Sigma, bottom is Sony.
Click for larger view.)Zeiss at 135mm F1.8.
The Sigma and Tamron have much more obvious spherical aberration. I thought the Tamron was alright at 135mm and a heck lot better than the Sigma at 200mm and close focus (1-2 meters.) The Sigma has very obvious softening!
Stuff I Did Not Compare
Color - I was in flourescent lighting. :(
Bokeh - the shop people kept moving about so the background changed quite a bit as you can see.
Replies: 5
 The thing that was different though, was that the plug was a standard classic Nokia charger plug! So, I could charge my Nokia when not charging my mouse... and, the mouse took rechargeable AAA batteries, so it was also a USB AAA battery charger!<br><br>Such genius, and yet they discontinued it (possibly Nokia sued?) so their later mice were all charged by docking, which is a very stupid place for a mouse to be in.<br><br>I had seen this magnetic-field powered mouse before years ago, but it had a label that said not to bring it within a certain distance of CRT monitors to prevent interference. I still use a 21)
 and the Sun (yellow) and Sky (blue) stage. Oh and the National Science Center in the back, in blue-green.<br><br><img src=)
It's not you, it's Justin Timberlake."
<br><br><img src=)
Jenifer is far more enthralled with my Peleng 8mm F3.5 circular fisheye!
Kellster is the new Fun-Size.
 Or maybe I have a soft spot for such a badass. That's kinda why I didn't flip channels when <b>Snakes On A Plane</b> was on.<br><br>The plot was easy to follow as well - I didn't feel lost. Dr. Manhattan's and Rorschach's mini-stories were fun to watch, too.<br><br>I enjoyed the period music (and that I recognized the artistes!) Earlier before watching the movie I heard a colleague playing Bob Dylan; I was surprised!<br><br><b>Me</b>: Wow, you listen to Bob Dylan?<br><a href=)
Rames: Yeah, this is from the Watchmen soundtrack!<br><br>It is also scientifically known that working out increases your sex drive. So let those superheroes bonk!<br><br>Then there's another question - was Adrian Veidt actually a bad guy, even though you left the cinema thinking he was a good guy? I thought he could be bad, since it seemed like such a coverline that he'd wield the remote in time to save his bullet-dodging ass.<br><br>I thought it was noble that Rorschach realized Veidt was right, but he would not admit it - instead he left his fate to Dr. Manhattan.<br><br><b>Janey Slater</b>: <i>Why are you leaving me? Is it because I'm getting old?</i><br><b>Dr. Manhattan</b>: <i>But it's true.</i><br><br>I could strongly relate to Dr. Manhattan, in the way I view the world in an outer, external way, with lessened concern for the people and their little concerns.<br><br>Near the end of the movie, when Seymour is asked by the newspaper editor to write an interesting story, the cinema ushers opened the doors... and people started flowing out. Did they all want to pee? I thought to myself, <b>man you guys just didn't get it.</b><br><br>Before the movie, a bunch of people in front of me were speaking Chinese. I thought then, if this was anything like <b>The Spirit</b>, you guys are not going to get it!<br><br>Also overheard - )
Is this a cartoon? I think it is." A pity then that the posters look like Batman & Robin hence the false impression.<br><br><img src=)
here (interestingly, 
here.
here.
Szetoo.
<br><br><img src=)
Eh, you can shred ah!"
</i>.<br><br>Wondered what the Butterfingers looked like back at Rock The World 1?<br><br><object width=)
Who wants a guitar?"
<br><br>More here:<br><a href=)
Rock The World 8: Part 2
Rock The Crowd 8<br><br>Shot, of course, with my birthday present to myself, the Sony Carl Zeiss 135mm F1.8 on the A900, at F1.8.<br><br>I also borrowed <a href=)
smashpOp's Minolta 28mm F2.8 - it would be the widest lens I'd bring, next to the Minolta 50mm F1.4. Much smaller than my Minolta 24-105mm F3.5-4.5 (which already was tiny!) The next few pictures are from the 28mm...<br><br>I was the sole representative from Xfresh that day. No Street Surfers, no nothing. Xfresh was one of the big logos on the Rock The World 8 logo! Thus, by association, I was one of the big logos...<br><br><img src=)
<br><br><a href=)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10186271-39.html
Xfresh X-Gig, 23rd October 2008, at Zouk - the finale for the first round of the X-Gig series! This is Emir of Throne Away, making an appearance with Stereo Socket.
<br><br><img src=)
