Wetpixel Printable Content :: Digital Underwater Photography and Videography

Wetpixel Printable Content, courtesy of Wetpixel.com. All content © Wetpixel.com and content authors.
This article may not be reproduced for commercial purposes without explicit consent from Wetpixel.com.

Join our community at Wetpixel! [back to Wetpixel.com] [close window]

Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Macro lens review

Posted: 14 December 2008 01:26 PM
Last Update: 14 December 2008 06:13 PM
7 comment(s)
Categories: Reviews,  Still Housings,  Accessories
Author: James Wiseman ( james )
This Article's URL: http://wetpixel.com/i.php/full/tamron-70-200mm-f-28-macro-lens-review/
Related Link: http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/70200_di.asp

Ever since I first purchased a Canon back in 2005 I’ve been looking for a replacement for the excellent Nikkor 70-180 macro zoom. The Nikkor is fantastic on a DX cropped camera, zooming from around 1:3 to 1:1. I purchased the Tamron lens for use on my full-frame Canon camera, and took it on the two-week Wetpixel staff trip to the Philippines back in May. Hopefully this review will be handy for folks looking for an excellent macro zoom lens.

To see how the lens fares as compared to other popular 70-200 zooms, check out the review at DPReview. I agree with the conclusions for topsides use. To summarize:
Pros: Lightweight, solidly built, and excellent optical quality;
Cons: Slow autofocus (no USM), clunky focus clutch mechanism.


Sigma 150mm, Tamron 70-200mm, Canon 100mm


Sigma 150mm, Tamron 70-200mm, Canon 100mm


Sigma 150mm, Tamron 70-200mm, Canon 100mm

Cost: the lens costs between $700 and $800 and comes in Nikon, Canon, and other popular mounts

Optical Performance: Topside without a diopter the optical performance is superb. Topsides when used with a single element diopter, the performance is terrible, however when an achromat diopter like the Canon 500D the performance is excellent!

The following test shots show the magnification possible with the lens. Using the 500D, the maximum magnification is 1:1.4


70mm – No Diopter


200mm – No Diopter


70mm with 500D Diopter (+2)


200mm with 500D Diopter (+2)


70mm with B+W +2 Diopter – Poor Performance


200mm with B+W +2 Diopter – Poor Performance

Underwater performance is also very good when used behind a flat port. Chromatic aberration was minimal and not noticeable more than I get from the 100mm or 150mm macro lenses.

Minimum Focus Distance: without a diopter, the minimum focus distance is 1 meter, or about 38 inches from the focal plane. Because the lens is so long, that is about 30” from the lens tip. When used with the 500D, the minimum focus distance is much reduced. Closest focus is about 12” from the lens tip.  Of course, minimum focus could be better - and you will find yourself underwater wanting to move in more – but is very respectable.

Port/Zoom/Focus Gears: I was able to easily set this lens up for my Seacam housing because I have a variety of macro ports and extensions. I even have a multi-port extension which has a zoom/focus knob on it – that can be placed into the mix to allow for even more flexibility. I started off using the multi-port as I thought I’d want to use the lens by focusing manually. The lens is so fat at the tip that I was not able to use a focus gear, but I used a trick I learned from Ryan Canon – using a piece of Velcro wrapped around the focus ring to give the focus knob/gear something to “bite” on. For a zoom gear, I found that the Seacam 100mm macro lens gear worked almost perfectly. I needed to put some <1mm thick rubber shims under where the gear grips the focus ring and voila! I did my first dives with the multi-port and the lens set in manual focus, then did my next dives using the lens in autofocus with the focus control on the * button. After those first few dives, I never went back to manual focus with this lens again, so I switched over to a straight flat port setup (as shown below).


Seacam housing with required macro port length – it’s a beast!

With the Seacam housing, approximately 205mm of extension is needed. The combination of rings that I used resulted in 210mm of extension which left a bit of air between the 500D diopter and the port.

Underwater Handling: Because the lens is long, the port is huge – and this has some pros and cons. On the plus side, the port traps a lot of air – which really helps by adding buoyancy. I added two of my “patented” foam buoyancy rings around the port base and the buoyancy/handling were just about perfect. The downside of the long port is that it requires you to push your strobes out in front considerably if you want to use creative and side lighting. This can contribute to the housing tilting forward if you have heavy strobe arms or strobes.

Overall Assessment: I would not hesitate to recommend this lens to anyone who is looking for a macro zoom – regardless of mount.  Because of the focal range and internal focusing system, the lens essentially offers a 50mm and a 100mm macro on the same dive. With a faster f2.8 aperture when compared to the Nikkor 70-180mm, this lens is a good AF performer. The 70-200mm zoom range of the Tamron also means it’s a “standard” topsides lens – meaning you’ll have a very respectable mid-range telephoto lens to use on your dive trip.

Sample Photos


70mm 1/160th @ f13


70mm 1/160th @ f13


Same subject – zoomed in to 200mm 1/160th @ f13


200mm 1/160th @ f16


70mm 1/100th @ f11


128mm 1/160th @ f16


200mm 1/160th @ f16 – cropped about 1.5x

-James Wiseman

7 Comment(s):

  1. If I “read” James’ minimum focus image at 200mm with the Canon 500D correctly, the length of the ruler on the image is approximately 45mm.  If James has shot this picture with his Canon 5D, a full-frame camera whose sensor is 36mm in length, then the maximum magnification is 45/36 or about 1:1.25 or 80% lifesize. 
    Since the Nikon 70-180 Micro-nikkor zoom focuses down .75x, the two are almost equivalent. 

    However, one can also use a dual element close-up lens on the Nikon lens, either Nikon’s 5T or slightly stronger 6T to reach 1:1 with the Micro-nikkor.

    The shallower depth-of-field at 2.8 with the Tamron lens may make this ooptic a better choice for shooting in dim light, or at night with a spotting light, when the brighter viewfinder image and shallower depth-of-field wide-open would be advantageous for both viewing and auto-focus.

    Fred

    Posted by divegypsy  on  12/14  at  08:25 PM
  2. At high magnification, 4 times as much light reaches the autofocus sensors (f2.8 vs f5.6 for the Nikkor).  That to many makes a huge difference in and of itself.

    Posted by James Wiseman  on  12/14  at  08:31 PM
  3. Excellent info.
    What is the largest subject you can shoot/shot on FF with the 500D attached? That batfish is impressively big - but with batfish it is hard to tell exactly how large they are! Did you take any photos of diver’s faces for example?
    Alex

    Posted by Dr. Alex Mustard  on  12/15  at  04:18 AM
  4. Hi Alex,

    Looking back through my shots (batfish, large puffer, etc.), I’d say you could easily shoot a subject 12” in diameter.  The batfish pictured is about that big.  Sorry, no divers faces on this trip - remember who I was with, Drew, Matt, and Herb ;-)

    Cheers
    James

    Posted by James Wiseman  on  12/15  at  05:36 AM
  5. Hello James & Alex,

    I cannot say what the maximum subject size with the Tamron lens combined with the 500D.  This can be checked easily on land by simply setting the lens at infinity and 70mm.  Going underwater ONLY increases the working distance by about 1.33x when you are shooting behind a flat port, due to the greater index of refraction of water.  This is an aspect where the Micro-nikkor has the advantage as it can focus all the way to infinity while still focusing to .75x without any close-up lenses.

    IF you are willing give up a degree of maximum magnification, you can increase maximum subject size by using a lens behind a dome port.  I frequently use the 70-180mm behind Seacam’s smallest dome which is the same diameter physically as the Seacam extension tubes. I don’t know what its exact radius of curvature is.  With this Seacam “macro-dome” I can only get down to about half (40%?) lifesize, but the lens then allows much bigger subjects, like cuttlefish and groupers to be photographed with ease and with considerably less water distance than with a flat port. 

    Autofocus is also noticeably faster because more distant subjects are optically much closer because the lens is focusing on the virtual image formed by the dome (not the real subject and physical subject distance).  And the lens requires much less change to focus distance to move from distant to closer subjects. 

    The difference between the 70-180 behind a flat glass and the small dome is so significant that it is almost like having two different lenses.  If you are using a cropped sensor camera (DX) the dome results in a “lens” that is very much like the original 70-180 behind a flat port on full-frame (FX).  The auto-focus remains faster behind the dome on any camera (DX or FX) than behind a flat port.  The same is true of using ANY macro lens, which has a greater focusing range, behind a dome.

    Fred

    Posted by divegypsy  on  12/15  at  10:49 AM
  6. Interesting Fred!  I think I have that same Seacam dome and I have used it w/ the 100mm macro - just playing around.  I’ll have to try it with the 70-200 Tamron for fish photography.  That is not to say that I was ever disappointed in the Philippines when I was using the flat port.

    James

    Posted by James Wiseman  on  12/15  at  11:12 AM

[Back to Wetpixel.com] [Close Window]