cuervo
Veteran
Got off my film shoot and spent sat. AM looking at the Tamron and Canon superzooms. In summary: 1-the Tamron superzoom outperforms the Canon superzoom by at least 2 points on the standard rez chart, at all f-stops and zoom ratios. I could only comparison test the Tamron at 35mm and 200mm, since the Canon max zoom is 200mm. Minimum focus with the Tamron is 1.5 ft, so, I had to carry 35mm instead of 24 to fit the frame at 1.5 ft. 2-I tested the canon with a Metabones speedbooster and with the standard Metabones Canon->Sony E-mount adapter. It's no surprise that the Speedbooster adds some loss of resolution, on the order of a point on the rez chart, reducing resolution, for example, from 10 to 9. This explains, at least to me, why the Canon resolution is on a par with the Sony 18-200 kit lens. There is no metabones glass on the Sony kit lens. 3-On a "seat of the pants" observation, the Tamron lens looks really really nice. I like it, plus it has that extra 100mm focal length over botht he Sony kit lens and the Canon superzoom. 4-On the down side, the Tamron exhibited some strange behavior with both Metabones adapters. When running in the advanced mode, there is a noticeable exposure step change while zooming the lens. I think the Metabones is trying to hold the aperture, but, the aperture is changing due to the zooming of the lens. So, the aperture changes as I zoom, then the Metabones catches up with the exposure change and there is a sudden step change in aperture. I never noticed this with the Canon glass. It makes shooting and simultaneous zooming rather unuseable. It works better in the green mode, but, there is still a small exposure step near the end of the zoom...
. Mounted on my Canon EOS 7D, the Tamron looks really good. I'm surprised, however, how soft the Canon looks. This is NOT a good lens; and, I wouldn't recommend it, at all. Because the Canon is an APS-C lens, it won't work on my Canon 5D, while the Tamron will.
Last edited: