hank you for your documentation for us, I had the old version of Sigma 70-200... I have tried this new version into photographer events in US, and I have been impressed by the sharpness and fast autofocus. , Your movies make me understand this lens to buy this new version in the future. I still want to watch all the documentation you made for us. I am so happy to get to know your work. I really appreciate!.
Thanks for your extremely valuable report, as always. This report really confirms what I'd decided and bought a few days ago - the Tamron 70-200 G2 rather than the new Sigma - that there is really very little difference between the two in performance terms. Tamron just edges ahead on some criteria and Sigma on others depending on focal length aperture and edge sharpness really. At present the Tamron is significantly cheaper than the Sigma (UK through grey). The Tamron being 77mm helps me save costs as I have that size of filters already (from Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS Mark One) whereas the Sigma offers 82mm. The 82mm of the Sigma does not appear to supply any real world 82mm advantage in terms of vignetting and I shoot RAW then Capture One Pro anyway. Focus breathing (where the "real" focal length at short distances is somewhat wider than the published figure) is an advantage in my particular usage (events and weddings in fast action close up with no time to even grab the 24-70 on my other body on my shoulder). The Tamron 1.4 teleconverter is significantly more expensive than the Sigma which is a pain. I will test the G2 with my Canon 1.4 Mark Two. But what sold the Tamron for me is - based on DA's previous new Sigma report a couple of weeks ago is that the Sigma tripod ring is big and heavy and not removable. An inexplicable fail for Sigma. Otherwise I may have looked more favourably on the Sigma as I have their 85mm Art and 20mm Art already anyway. The Sigma USB dock is slightly cheaper than the Tamron tap-in console - I have both as I already had bought the 24-70 G2 after DA's reports. Both these devices are great but may become redundant with mirrorless other than for lens firmware updates. Thanks again DA.
To be fair, 82mm filters are not much different than 77mm filters in price. But yes, I would have liked to have see less vignette and better light transmission.
Thanks for providing the location of the summary! Immense help for someone on their way to work with limited time. Perhaps bokeh and focus breathing will be the deciding factors? Looking forward to part two.
The mount is the same, so I assume you are referring to the front element size. Sometimes the number of elements and/or the coatings can also impact light transmissions.
Great review. Thank you. I have the Sigma 70 - 200 2.8 Sport and am very happy and impressed with this lens. I was wondering, prior to your lens reviews do you micro adjust the lenses? I have noticed wide open @ 200 mm is a tad soft until f8. Nothing significant but it is noticeable. What was your experience in this? Thanks again for your great reviews.
I always do a calibration, though when I do comparisons like these, I use Live View 10X magnification and don't refocus in between shots. But no, I didn't find the lens soft at 200mm.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yeah, that's what i thought, but, talking about flange distance, i think that it shouldn't be an issue too, in terms of image quality (sharpness) in the certer or in the corners of the frame, right?
I'm hoping that you will compare focus tracking and accuracy against the Canon version. That result will decide which lens I buy. Both have great image quality.
Very nice. I have been waiting for this review. Thank you from Germany. I have bought the Milvus 135mm and the sigma 70-200 sport, after your reviews. I am very happy. Thank you.
New lens vs older lens. Old lens still holding it's own. For some focus breathing is an issue but for me it's not. Have the G2 Nikon lens & what I found immediately was how great it is for indoor sports like basketball & volleyball when players get very close when I'm shooting from baseline. Tamron will focus in very close without any problems & still retains fast autofocus. Don't see replacing it anytime soon unless a better G3 version is made.
Great review! Was excited about this one. Looking forward to the next part where i think we going to see a difference in real world rendering with the focus breathing and magnification. 😁👍
I have the Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC (gen 1 I guess, and for Nikon) which also has the focus breathing issues like the G2. I know some people don't care about focus breathing but I don't like it. It's nice to see Sigma offer a 3rd party solution that resolves the issue. Although the weight of the Sigma lens gives pause at the same time. But this isn't to say that Tamron's offerings are bad. They're great. In fact, you can probably find great value in a second-hand gen 1 lens. I bought mine for $500 USD; can't complain about much at that price point.
I love my 70-200 G2 and just had it out on a drive through the Superstitions while the rain was falling yesterday. It is one of my favorite landscape lenses. One huge (perceived) advantage over the Sigma -and am only guessing at this based on several of their lenses I own and use regularly is the Tamron's VC. The image stabilization just doesn't seem to do much on my couple of Sigma's that have it.
This Sigma is somewhat improved, but Tamron is still better in this metric. The Tamron is rated at 5 stops in the capture-priority mode; the Sigma at 4.
Sorry Dustin, I didn't catch the distance that the shots were taken at, Im trying to compare how much focus breathing there was to relate to the loss of mm, If you can specify this would be great ?, Thanks - and I have to also say, I love your reviews and I am also on the fence about which one to buy so looking forward to the next part of this series. Thanks again.
OMG Perfect timing! I got sick of waiting for the Sigma Sport to come out (I own nearly every Sigma Prime and the 24-70 so love the Art Series) so bought the Tamron about 3-4 months ago. Thinking about making the switch cos I'm mildly OCD and love owning all the one brand haha. Silly I know. Can't wait to hear your comparison! I'll get back to watching the vid, just had to share my appreciation! lol
My workstation is a Dell XPS system that (frankly) needs updating. I’ve kept it up by doing major upgrades over the years, but this year I’ll build a new workstation
Did you notice a drop of sharpness at minimun distance and 200mm F2.8 with the Sigma? I saw that on other reviews, the corners of the frame appeared to turn terrible even at F8.
Yep. If you look at the next video in the series, I demonstrate how that the Sigma doesn't focus breathe like the Tamron, but the Tamron does perform considerably better at minimum focus.
Great episode as usual. I love nitty gritty comparisons. Will you be doing one that shows the Sigma real world performance on the Sony? Who quick it focuses vs how many shots it gets sharp? i.e. sports, dancing or any other moving subjects?
@@DustinAbbottTWI I get it. That's a LOT of time. I just know how many Sony shooters are looking for an alternative to the $2,600 beast. (a great beast but still a beast) Any comments on it will be appreciated I'm sure!
I'll demonstrate that some in the final review. The third option (programmable through the USB Dock) is where I saw the best performance. Just know, however, that it is rated at one stop less than the Tamron, though.
It looks like it will be quite compact, but little is known about the actual lens yet. It's hard to call it "better" when no one knows how it will perform.
I've been waiting for this video to come out, so thank you again! Just as a suggestion( I'm not sure you can do this now) but you should change the title stating it's a comparison video. I almost didn't click on it even though you've told me the videos coming out soon since I've messaged you about it. I assume you'll probably get more views in the end 😉 Finally after this review I'm buying the Tamron and will probably buy the whole trinity as I'm switching from all primes to zooms. Thank you so much and keep up the good work!
Very nice. I'd love if the Sigma was available for Sony FE - definitely prefer the black color rather than white. I wonder if someone will figure out a hack to remove the dumb tripod collar from the Sigma though - that would almost be a hard requirement honestly.
Very interesting comparison. The Sigma definitely favours my style of use, mainly at the long end where the framing is tighter than the Tamron. I don't worry too much normally about focus breathing, but that fact it does it less (or not at all) than the Tamron is good in my books. One thing I'm not keen on, and the same is true on the Tamron is that the zoom ring is at the front rather than the back like the Canon lens. Its personal preference but I much prefer the Canon way of doing things and find myself to be more stable holding the lens towards the rear while zooming....
400Wedge I agree about the zoom ring, but there may not be much choice. The Sigma is even bigger than the Tamron (4 lbs. to 3.3 lbs.) and looks very front-heavy. You probably need your hand out front just to balance the thing.
@@JohnDrummondPhoto If the zoom ring is nice and smooth on the Sigma at the front then that would help. I used to have the Tamron G2 and didn't find it that smooth or free turning, so when I was zooming I'd be creating movement at the front of the lens. Its a shame there is additional weight, I had been trying to lighten my camera bag...
400Wedge I agree. I tested the Tamron last year and found it both heavy and a bit stiff to zoom. Wound up buying the much lighter Canon 70-200 F/4L IS since I don't really need F/2.8 for what I shoot.
The Sigma's zoom ring is definitely better damped. By the way, Canon varies the position of the zoom and focus rings just like everyone else according to the lens (the 70-300L is opposite, for example).
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for the reply, that's good to hear about the Sigma zoom ring. I'll look forward to getting my hands on one to try out. I currently have the 70-300L, great lens although I'm replacing mine with a Sigma 100-400 Contemporary for the extra reach.
So far the real flaws of each are the focus breathing for the Tamron and the weight of Sigma's. I really can't wrap my head around the fact that it is the heaviest 70-200mm f/2.8 around. Even heavier than Canon's!
I would've preferred Dustin used his "currency" focus board. I think the differences would've been clearer than a stone wall. After showing the focus breathing, I would've adjusted for it to show a real apples-to-apples view. I've got both lenses and the 1.4x II (with the III on the way), so that'll be a project for me in the future.
You'll have to find that elsewhere, as I don't have the Canon on hand. The Tamron is a better comparison, though (IMO), as 1) it is closer in price and 2) it is relevant to both Canon and Nikon shooters.
I really might just not care about the weight if I can make myself save some more money. This plus an MC-11 is still $850 USD cheaper than the 70-200 G Master, and I somehow doubt the G Master is $850 better.
Per this review I believe that Tamron is 60-180mm not 70-200, which I believe is a better focal length, in my opinion. For events it might be the only lens you need plus a 24 or 35 prime for wide angles. Sigma good lens are getting to heavyweight when the OEM are lighter.
If not for the focus breathing at 200mm, which is where you will be often with this lens, the Tamron would be an insane value. But you are paying for a 200mm not a 175mm.
Thanks Dustin for great analysis.The king of 70-200 mm f/2.8 range for photography purposes is only Nikon E version.I am pretty sure in Canon realm,same will apply with original(last L version )lens as well. Sigma?Tamron?Oh,boy!
Dustin Abbott that’s magenta color on Sigma does not look pleasing to me ... however , they both perform really well :) Thanks for your time , Dustin !
Focus breathing is an implied term that should not be taken lightly. A lens that does not offer 200mm for which you are paying should be discarded. When you say that in 70mm the lens offers a wider view it is an error. It offers a wider view than the sigma simply because the Tamron G2 is not giving you 70mm. (It really is 63mm). I think you are not paying attention to that fact and it is extremely important. Especially if you are going to work on portrait.
@@DustinAbbottTWI It really is not an advantage if you need it to be a real 70mm. The fact that I would focus closer would be worthwhile if I retained the corresponding millimeters in both 70 and 200. For the kind of work I do I would definitely discard the Tamron G2. Thanks for the info.
@@victormiguelperezpedrogo4223 Exactly! For example, for video, VFX work needs precise lens data. If you type focal lenght as 70mm when it's not, you are going to be in trouble.
@@victormiguelperezpedrogo4223 at the wide end you can compensate for focus breathing by zooming in. You can't zoom out more on the Sigma if you want wider than 70. I believe that's what Dustin was getting at. Now on the narrow end you have the opposite problem because there is no possibility to compensate for needing 200mm.
Jesse Evans that the thing I don’t want to zoom in. I want to have a real 70mm in a zoom lens. I don’t blame lens company’s for having this issue. But they have to inform photographers that’s there paying for something that is not real. I don’t want a 63-187mm I want a 70-200mm.
Sorry, the videos are already shot and the lens returned to Sigma. I have to work weeks to months in advance now because of the volume of content I have.
Thank for you telling me to have to do what I've been doing successfully for years ;) BTW, I completely disagree. A 2-dimensional object (a newspaper or chart) does not produce as accurate results as a 3 dimensional object with depth - that reveals things like longitudinal chromatic aberrations. We shoot 3 dimensional subjects in the real world; why would we use 2 dimensional subjects to test gear?
Was so close to buying the Tamron.. then just recently decided I'm going to spend the extra money and get the sigma but now the sigma is out of stock everywhere 🤯😭 Only seeing grey market in stock and one new lens on Amazon for $500 markup 😡 Wtf is going on
hank you for your documentation for us, I had the old version of Sigma 70-200... I have tried this new version into photographer events in US, and I have been impressed by the sharpness and fast autofocus. , Your movies make me understand this lens to buy this new version in the future. I still want to watch all the documentation you made for us. I am so happy to get to know your work. I really appreciate!.
You're welcome.
Thanks for your extremely valuable report, as always. This report really confirms what I'd decided and bought a few days ago - the Tamron 70-200 G2 rather than the new Sigma - that there is really very little difference between the two in performance terms. Tamron just edges ahead on some criteria and Sigma on others depending on focal length aperture and edge sharpness really.
At present the Tamron is significantly cheaper than the Sigma (UK through grey). The Tamron being 77mm helps me save costs as I have that size of filters already (from Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS Mark One) whereas the Sigma offers 82mm. The 82mm of the Sigma does not appear to supply any real world 82mm advantage in terms of vignetting and I shoot RAW then Capture One Pro anyway.
Focus breathing (where the "real" focal length at short distances is somewhat wider than the published figure) is an advantage in my particular usage (events and weddings in fast action close up with no time to even grab the 24-70 on my other body on my shoulder).
The Tamron 1.4 teleconverter is significantly more expensive than the Sigma which is a pain. I will test the G2 with my Canon 1.4 Mark Two.
But what sold the Tamron for me is - based on DA's previous new Sigma report a couple of weeks ago is that the Sigma tripod ring is big and heavy and not removable. An inexplicable fail for Sigma. Otherwise I may have looked more favourably on the Sigma as I have their 85mm Art and 20mm Art already anyway.
The Sigma USB dock is slightly cheaper than the Tamron tap-in console - I have both as I already had bought the 24-70 G2 after DA's reports. Both these devices are great but may become redundant with mirrorless other than for lens firmware updates.
Thanks again DA.
It’s difficult to make a lens that is really head and shoulders above the pack these days
Sigma builds this lens with huge frontal elements: super heavy, expensive filter big and still vignettes as crazy.
To be fair, 82mm filters are not much different than 77mm filters in price. But yes, I would have liked to have see less vignette and better light transmission.
I want this lens in e mount
I suspect it will come, though so far it has only been prime lenses in E mount.
Would I be able to use the old 2x teleconverter on this with ftz? Or would I have to get the new teleconverter?
You'd have to ask Sigma that. I suspect it would work, but wouldn't work as well as the newer version.
Thanks for providing the location of the summary! Immense help for someone on their way to work with limited time. Perhaps bokeh and focus breathing will be the deciding factors? Looking forward to part two.
Stay tuned. The second episode is next Friday
sigma has larger mount but in the same exposure setting tamron give you a little speed more, it's because of glass or something else ?
The mount is the same, so I assume you are referring to the front element size. Sometimes the number of elements and/or the coatings can also impact light transmissions.
Great review. Thank you. I have the Sigma 70 - 200 2.8 Sport and am very happy and impressed with this lens. I was wondering, prior to your lens reviews do you micro adjust the lenses? I have noticed wide open @ 200 mm is a tad soft until f8. Nothing significant but it is noticeable. What was your experience in this? Thanks again for your great reviews.
I always do a calibration, though when I do comparisons like these, I use Live View 10X magnification and don't refocus in between shots. But no, I didn't find the lens soft at 200mm.
Is there any loss in image quality when adapting to the mirrorless system? (canon or nikon mirrorless cameras)?
There shouldn't be with a good adapter, as the adapters are just air - no extra glass.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yeah, that's what i thought, but, talking about flange distance, i think that it shouldn't be an issue too, in terms of image quality (sharpness) in the certer or in the corners of the frame, right?
The adapters are designed to make up that difference. When an adapter sits properly, I've seen very little image degradation.
How accurate is the AF? Is one faster than the other? Or more accurate.
I'll deal with that in the final review. There's not much difference though, once you enable speed priority on the Sigma.
I'm hoping that you will compare focus tracking and accuracy against the Canon version. That result will decide which lens I buy. Both have great image quality.
I don’t have the Canon on hand. I do deal with focus accuracy, but not that comparison
Do you have any plans on reviewing the Sony 70-300?
Not immediately. It’s hard to go back and do catalog lenses when so much new keeps coming out
Finally! Super excited
Enjoy
Thank you very much for this great work. i hope you gonna show soon how its work with MC-11
I do talk about that in the final review and in Part 2 of the IQ breakdown, too.
Good review, the Tamron G2 is a great lens
It remains a great value. It has a few flaws, but punches above its weight
@@DustinAbbottTWI I use my Tamron 70-200 G2 for Wild Life and Portraits here in S Africa thanks to your review Dustin
Great in-depth review. As always! 👍👍✨
Thank you
Very nice. I have been waiting for this review. Thank you from Germany.
I have bought the Milvus 135mm and the sigma 70-200 sport, after your reviews. I am very happy. Thank you.
Glad to hear it!
New lens vs older lens. Old lens still holding it's own. For some focus breathing is an issue but for me it's not. Have the G2 Nikon lens & what I found immediately was how great it is for indoor sports like basketball & volleyball when players get very close when I'm shooting from baseline. Tamron will focus in very close without any problems & still retains fast autofocus. Don't see replacing it anytime soon unless a better G3 version is made.
There's definitely pros and cons
Thank you Mr Abbott.
Great job Abbott thanks for the intel on those lenses
My pleasure
Great review! Was excited about this one. Looking forward to the next part where i think we going to see a difference in real world rendering with the focus breathing and magnification. 😁👍
I think you'll enjoy the next segment. It gets a little more real-world.
Amazing review keep it up sir.
Thank you!
I have the Tamron 70-200 F2.8 VC (gen 1 I guess, and for Nikon) which also has the focus breathing issues like the G2. I know some people don't care about focus breathing but I don't like it. It's nice to see Sigma offer a 3rd party solution that resolves the issue. Although the weight of the Sigma lens gives pause at the same time.
But this isn't to say that Tamron's offerings are bad. They're great. In fact, you can probably find great value in a second-hand gen 1 lens. I bought mine for $500 USD; can't complain about much at that price point.
That’s an amazing price. I don’t love the focus breathing, either, but it isn’t the end of the world, either
Great reviews,
Thanks
I love my 70-200 G2 and just had it out on a drive through the Superstitions while the rain was falling yesterday. It is one of my favorite landscape lenses. One huge (perceived) advantage over the Sigma -and am only guessing at this based on several of their lenses I own and use regularly is the Tamron's VC. The image stabilization just doesn't seem to do much on my couple of Sigma's that have it.
This Sigma is somewhat improved, but Tamron is still better in this metric. The Tamron is rated at 5 stops in the capture-priority mode; the Sigma at 4.
Sorry Dustin, I didn't catch the distance that the shots were taken at, Im trying to compare how much focus breathing there was to relate to the loss of mm, If you can specify this would be great ?, Thanks - and I have to also say, I love your reviews and I am also on the fence about which one to buy so looking forward to the next part of this series. Thanks again.
I deal with the focus breathing a lot more in the next episode. These shots were taken at about 11 feet (70-100mm) and 15 feet (135-280mm)
OMG Perfect timing! I got sick of waiting for the Sigma Sport to come out (I own nearly every Sigma Prime and the 24-70 so love the Art Series) so bought the Tamron about 3-4 months ago. Thinking about making the switch cos I'm mildly OCD and love owning all the one brand haha. Silly I know. Can't wait to hear your comparison! I'll get back to watching the vid, just had to share my appreciation! lol
I think after the next episode you'll have a pretty good over whether or not you'll want to make the switch.
Informative as always. Thanks Dustin!
Would you mind sharing what the specs to your workstation are? The 1:1 zoom is super quick!
You can render 1:1 previews in LR and then the zoom to 1:1 will be similarly fast
@@TheGodX not on my 2010 MacBook I can tell you.
My workstation is a Dell XPS system that (frankly) needs updating. I’ve kept it up by doing major upgrades over the years, but this year I’ll build a new workstation
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for the reply! The specs on those XPS systems aren't too shabby
Have you tested the Tamron version
Are you able to do a search on his channel?
Very extensively. Search my channel
Another thing I've noticed it seems that the the photos from this Sigma lenses seem to have alot of aliasing, some would call it the "digital look".
I guess I would have to know a little more specifically what you are referring to. IQ is quite nice from the lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI The photos seem to feel a little bit "jaggy".
Did you notice a drop of sharpness at minimun distance and 200mm F2.8 with the Sigma? I saw that on other reviews, the corners of the frame appeared to turn terrible even at F8.
Yep. If you look at the next video in the series, I demonstrate how that the Sigma doesn't focus breathe like the Tamron, but the Tamron does perform considerably better at minimum focus.
Great episode as usual. I love nitty gritty comparisons. Will you be doing one that shows the Sigma real world performance on the Sony? Who quick it focuses vs how many shots it gets sharp? i.e. sports, dancing or any other moving subjects?
I’ll touch on focus, but not too in depth. My coverage of the 70-200 S is going to be over 80 minutes in total as it is
@@DustinAbbottTWI I get it. That's a LOT of time. I just know how many Sony shooters are looking for an alternative to the $2,600 beast. (a great beast but still a beast) Any comments on it will be appreciated I'm sure!
Hi Dustin have you compared OS performance? Sigma is boasting some vastly improved OS technology
I'll demonstrate that some in the final review. The third option (programmable through the USB Dock) is where I saw the best performance. Just know, however, that it is rated at one stop less than the Tamron, though.
Weight. Should Eos R 70-200 be a better option in respect of weight and volume?
It looks like it will be quite compact, but little is known about the actual lens yet. It's hard to call it "better" when no one knows how it will perform.
please compare with canon 70-200 f2.8 is iii
I don’t have the Canon on hand, and have already returned the Sigma to Sigma
I've been waiting for this video to come out, so thank you again! Just as a suggestion( I'm not sure you can do this now) but you should change the title stating it's a comparison video. I almost didn't click on it even though you've told me the videos coming out soon since I've messaged you about it. I assume you'll probably get more views in the end 😉
Finally after this review I'm buying the Tamron and will probably buy the whole trinity as I'm switching from all primes to zooms. Thank you so much and keep up the good work!
Also I'm kind of resenting you for making me spend so much money 😂 jk
Very nice. I'd love if the Sigma was available for Sony FE - definitely prefer the black color rather than white. I wonder if someone will figure out a hack to remove the dumb tripod collar from the Sigma though - that would almost be a hard requirement honestly.
So far Sigma has done FE on the primes but not zooms. The word I have is that Tamron will have a new 70-200 for FE before the year is out
Very interesting comparison. The Sigma definitely favours my style of use, mainly at the long end where the framing is tighter than the Tamron. I don't worry too much normally about focus breathing, but that fact it does it less (or not at all) than the Tamron is good in my books. One thing I'm not keen on, and the same is true on the Tamron is that the zoom ring is at the front rather than the back like the Canon lens. Its personal preference but I much prefer the Canon way of doing things and find myself to be more stable holding the lens towards the rear while zooming....
400Wedge I agree about the zoom ring, but there may not be much choice. The Sigma is even bigger than the Tamron (4 lbs. to 3.3 lbs.) and looks very front-heavy. You probably need your hand out front just to balance the thing.
@@JohnDrummondPhoto If the zoom ring is nice and smooth on the Sigma at the front then that would help. I used to have the Tamron G2 and didn't find it that smooth or free turning, so when I was zooming I'd be creating movement at the front of the lens. Its a shame there is additional weight, I had been trying to lighten my camera bag...
400Wedge I agree. I tested the Tamron last year and found it both heavy and a bit stiff to zoom. Wound up buying the much lighter Canon 70-200 F/4L IS since I don't really need F/2.8 for what I shoot.
The Sigma's zoom ring is definitely better damped. By the way, Canon varies the position of the zoom and focus rings just like everyone else according to the lens (the 70-300L is opposite, for example).
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for the reply, that's good to hear about the Sigma zoom ring. I'll look forward to getting my hands on one to try out. I currently have the 70-300L, great lens although I'm replacing mine with a Sigma 100-400 Contemporary for the extra reach.
So far the real flaws of each are the focus breathing for the Tamron and the weight of Sigma's. I really can't wrap my head around the fact that it is the heaviest 70-200mm f/2.8 around. Even heavier than Canon's!
That’s become Sigmas thing, unfortunately
The real flaw of this is non removeable collar.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Definitely true! I'm still shocked after seeing their 85 f/1.4 and 135mm f/1.8!!!
@@cmdr.shepard It might be, but a collar doesn't weigh a pound.
I would've preferred Dustin used his "currency" focus board. I think the differences would've been clearer than a stone wall. After showing the focus breathing, I would've adjusted for it to show a real apples-to-apples view. I've got both lenses and the 1.4x II (with the III on the way), so that'll be a project for me in the future.
That was before I had my test chart
i'd like to see a comparison between the canon 70-200 and not tamron
You'll have to find that elsewhere, as I don't have the Canon on hand. The Tamron is a better comparison, though (IMO), as 1) it is closer in price and 2) it is relevant to both Canon and Nikon shooters.
Got it Dustin, fair reasons. thank you for the video BTW
I really might just not care about the weight if I can make myself save some more money. This plus an MC-11 is still $850 USD cheaper than the 70-200 G Master, and I somehow doubt the G Master is $850 better.
It is almost undoubtedly not.
Dustin Abbott Canon version is best than Sony in optical and mechanical construction. Sigma it’s almost the same thing as Canon
Better*
Per this review I believe that Tamron is 60-180mm not 70-200, which I believe is a better focal length, in my opinion. For events it might be the only lens you need plus a 24 or 35 prime for wide angles. Sigma good lens are getting to heavyweight when the OEM are lighter.
I definitely agree on the weight issue
If not for the focus breathing at 200mm, which is where you will be often with this lens, the Tamron would be an insane value. But you are paying for a 200mm not a 175mm.
No argument from me. That's my least favorite aspect of the lens. It hasn't been a dealbreaker, though, and I've owned the Tamron since release.
Thanks Dustin for great analysis.The king of 70-200 mm f/2.8 range for photography purposes is only Nikon E version.I am pretty sure in Canon realm,same will apply with original(last L version )lens as well. Sigma?Tamron?Oh,boy!
Optically the Sigma and Tamron are essentially every bit as good as those lenses.
I still prefer the color rendition on Tamron lens :)
That may be the case (though color, like bokeh, is subjective).
Dustin Abbott that’s magenta color on Sigma does not look pleasing to me ... however , they both perform really well :)
Thanks for your time , Dustin !
Focus breathing is an implied term that should not be taken lightly. A lens that does not offer 200mm for which you are paying should be discarded. When you say that in 70mm the lens offers a wider view it is an error. It offers a wider view than the sigma simply because the Tamron G2 is not giving you 70mm. (It really is 63mm). I think you are not paying attention to that fact and it is extremely important. Especially if you are going to work on portrait.
Right, but in this case that is advantageous
@@DustinAbbottTWI It really is not an advantage if you need it to be a real 70mm. The fact that I would focus closer would be worthwhile if I retained the corresponding millimeters in both 70 and 200. For the kind of work I do I would definitely discard the Tamron G2. Thanks for the info.
@@victormiguelperezpedrogo4223 Exactly! For example, for video, VFX work needs precise lens data. If you type focal lenght as 70mm when it's not, you are going to be in trouble.
@@victormiguelperezpedrogo4223 at the wide end you can compensate for focus breathing by zooming in. You can't zoom out more on the Sigma if you want wider than 70.
I believe that's what Dustin was getting at.
Now on the narrow end you have the opposite problem because there is no possibility to compensate for needing 200mm.
Jesse Evans that the thing I don’t want to zoom in. I want to have a real 70mm in a zoom lens. I don’t blame lens company’s for having this issue. But they have to inform photographers that’s there paying for something that is not real. I don’t want a 63-187mm I want a 70-200mm.
Can't wait for you to get your hands on that new RF 70-200mm F2.8 from Canon to review. 🤤
That's a really intriguing lens because of how compact it is!
I always enjoy your reviews, very accurate and scientific. I hope my TH-cam channel will half of your impact. Great as usual!
I wish you the best
Just as I though I decided in the Sigma, now I also need to consider the Tamron. Stop confusing me!
I'm afraid the choice is complicated these days.
Everyone are holding they breath for the focus reliability review
I'll deal with that in the final review.
Good review ...but those endless grey bricks!......
Yes, it does get redundant, but giving people the empirical data allows them to draw their own conclusions, which I think is important.
In your next video please test breathing while pulling focus for video work as well.
Sorry, the videos are already shot and the lens returned to Sigma. I have to work weeks to months in advance now because of the volume of content I have.
There is only one well proven target for lens comparison - a NEWS PAPER! Using gray bricks are at least questionable.
Thank for you telling me to have to do what I've been doing successfully for years ;) BTW, I completely disagree. A 2-dimensional object (a newspaper or chart) does not produce as accurate results as a 3 dimensional object with depth - that reveals things like longitudinal chromatic aberrations. We shoot 3 dimensional subjects in the real world; why would we use 2 dimensional subjects to test gear?
Was so close to buying the Tamron.. then just recently decided I'm going to spend the extra money and get the sigma but now the sigma is out of stock everywhere 🤯😭
Only seeing grey market in stock and one new lens on Amazon for $500 markup 😡
Wtf is going on
I do know that some supply chains have been disrupted
@@DustinAbbottTWI guess I'm buying the canon iii