Support
You can support this site without any cost or disadvantage at all by clicking this link to Amazon or the one on the left before buying anything – be it underpants, a cupboard, a TV, a pen, a lens or a camera. Amazon is the only shop worldwide, I’m really satisfied with to a 100%, so I have no caveats advertising them. Of course, you can also directly donate a small amount of money, e.g. the amount you would have spent for a magazine, with the button on the left.
Tamron SP AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 Di VC USD
A Tamron tele zoom for all EOS "fullframe" or 35mm film cameras and a long tele zoom on half-frame (so called "APS-C") Canon EOS DSLRs, where the smaller sensor let's this lens have an angle of view like a 112 - 480mm lens would have on 35mm.
This lens is a gem! Stop reading here and buy one! The rest is just my observations, if you are interested.
This is the Tamron-version of the very popular image-stabilzed medium-speed tele-zoom-league - this lens-class is so popular and important, that Canon built the first lens in the world ever with Image Stabilization ("IS"), from any brand, within this category: The 75-300mm IS USM. Today there is the second version of the Canon - zoom available and it is very reasonably priced, with this Tamron not being significantly cheaper. Normally, I would always and strongly suggest buying the Canon in such a case, but I have bought and do still own this Tamron instead. Why? Because it really is a fantastic lens, better than the Canon in my opinion, and nearly reaching L-level optically.
Excursus on IS: Within the lens are gyro sensors to detect small movement of the lens, e.g. due to a weak photographer drinking too much coffee. The electronics then move an optical element within the lens to compensate for this. Basically, this is a forced decentering of an element to move the picture projected to the film / sensor to make it stable... you jitter and move the lens a little to the right and the lens moves the projection a little to the left within miliseconds. As simple as that. IS was the last real revolution in lens design, to a much higher degree than Canon probably knew at that point. IS makes tripods obsolete. Even with this very first implementation of IS, if I really need to, I can handhold this lens at 70mm and get sharp pictures at shutter-speeds down to 1/2 second - not every shot and only if I concentrate on holding it steady, but I WILL get a sharp shot. At 1/15 second, I don't even have to force myself to stay calm. If there is a possibility to rest my elbow supporting the lens, it gets even easier. Today, with digital cameras and variable ISOs, I don't need shutter speeds slower than 1/2 second, never. What IS is NOT, other than Canon advertised it back then and sometimes manufacturers still do today, is to substitute speed (large apertures). Large apertures are used a) to reduce depth of field and b) to get faster shutter speeds. And while IS naturally can't help with a), it helps with b) only as far as lower shutter speeds are needed to deal with camera shake, but not to deal with movement of your subject! That's the reason, why IS is much more important with tele lenses than it is with others: At 300mm on "fullframe", you need something around 1/150 to 1/300 second to hold it steady. To not blurr moving people or most other moving objects, you'll need 1/100 second or, if they hold relatively still, e.g. sit on a table, lets say at least something around 1/50, at 1/25 you'll really need luck. As these needed speeds are much slower than the speeds needed to compesate for camera shake, IS helps. When using a 50mm lens (or less), you need 1/50 or less to deal with camera shake, which is also needed for your living subject, so that IS doesn't help here anymore. With short lenses, IS only helps with landscapes.
This Tamron is relatively small and light for it's focal length, especially compared to similar L-lenses, but bigger and heavier than the Canon 70-300, optically very good on "fullframe" and half-frame ("APS-C") with very fast AF and very good, even if not great, mechanics. Optics, AF and mechanics are better than the (new) Canon 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 IS USM.
COMPATIBILITY
As a classic Canon EF - lens, it works perfectly with every Canon EOS camera, film or digital, ever made.
On APS-C it has the field of view of a 112-480mm lens would have on 35mm, which is really long.
Warning: There's always potential compatibility-issues with third-party lenses and newer bodies, but this has never happened to Tamron - products in the past, so that I personally don't rate this risk as high. And keep the price in mind when judging this risk.
PRICE
It sometimes sells for around € 300,- new and only a bit below this used, so I'd always buy it new - the small saving isn't worth the lack of warranty and the possibility to get a bad sample and not being able to return it.
ACCESSORIES
It is shipped with a shade, I don't use. I use a collapsible rubber-shade instead, because it is a lot smaller.
It uses relatively seldom 62mm filters, but works without vignetting with a 58mm-step-down-ring, 58mm rubber hood screwed in front of it and stacking an additional filter on top of the protective one - great.
Nothing turns, so filters are a joy to use.
MECHANICS
Made in Japan.
Metal lens mount.
The lens itself seems to be built of a combination of metal and plastics and seems quite sturdy. While it feels a lot better - and heavier - than cheap consumer lenses, with tight tolerances and high-quality plastics, it's still quite far from L - lenses in both regards. I always found it to be nice in size and weight, a bit bigger than the Canon in length and diameter and between the "normal" and the "L" 70-300 in weight. The inner lens barrel, the moving part when zooming, shows no wobbling, other than the Canon. The focus - ring feels quite nice and damped - not as good as L-lenses, but nice. The zoom - ring is a bit stiff, but smooth.
When zoomed towards the long end, the lens extends by about 50% of it's size at 70mm. There's near to no play in the inner zoom-barrels nonetheless, which is a lot better than many other (especially so called "kit -") lenses or the Canon.
AF accuracy is fine with just a tiny bit of front focus (+1 MFA on my 5D Mark II), nearly identical on my Rebel XT, 40D, 5D Mark II and 50E. This is in the range, in which most of my genuine EF - lenses behave, too.
The AF - motor is Tamrons implementation of the great ring-USM used in most Canon USM - lenses, being not exactly as fast, but still extremely good, nearly silent and enabling instant manual override. Nothing rotates while focussing, other than with the Canon.
ERGONOMICS
It is a relatively small and light lens for it's range, the Canon 70-300L is a lot bigger. Size DOES matter, also see Lenses: What's important? so this is a real plus. It fits in all of my photo - bags and rucksacks in a standing position, even if it's near the limit, so that I actually bring it and actually use it, when I want to, what's not the case with my 70-210mm 1:2.8.
The 70-300 balances well on two- or one-digit EOS bodies and so is very easy to hold steady on these. On the smallest half-frame bodies like the Rebels / three-digit-EOS, it is a tiny bit front-heavy.
The used materials, a combination of metal and high quality plastics, look and feel sturdy and nice and worlds better than todays consumer- or kit-lenses, but on the other hand, still a tiny bit behind L-class-lenses.
The lens extends with zooming, but the filter-thread does not rotate when focussing, making it easy to use polarizers or grads right. Gladly, the extending front doesn't come at the expense of a too front-balanced combination - even on a three-digit-EOS it doesn't feel too long and is quite easy to hold still.
There is a focus-scale behind a window without infrared-focus-indices and without a depth-of-field scale.
Zoom- and manual-focus-rings feel dampened, not scratchy or sticky.
OPTICS
Optics of this tele-lens are great. Nearly, but not exactly on the level of a 70-200/4 L IS and the 70-300 L, but much better than anything else in it's class, including the Canon 70-300 IS USM non-L.
The minimum focus distance is 1.5m, so at 300mm, the maximum magnification is aprox. 1:4 and as such very good, making a sperate macro-lens obsolete in most cases.
Distortion is really good in absolute terms and not an issue from 70 to 200mm, but gets a bit worse at 300mm (pincushion). It is of a uniform kind, though, and easy to correct in postprocessing.
Vignetting is not visible on APS-C and visible but very good on "fullformat".
The aperture is made of 9 blades, giving you very nice bokeh and out-of-focus highlights and extraordinary 18-ray-light-stars.
I have no information on this lens' usability for for infrared-photography, sorry.
With a maximum aperture of f/5.6 at 300mm, this lens is able to produce quite blurred backgrounds if used right: Focal length is more important than f-stop for blurring the background, so use it at 300mm and try to manage to get enough distance between your subject and the background while being relatively close to the subject. The difference to faster, e.g. f/2.8, lenses is much less pronounced, than you'd expect or would justify the weight - and size - difference in my opinion (and I own an f/2.8 - tele).
Flare is nothing to worry about with this lens. While I think, that a lens less prone to flare and ghosting is not always better, as at least ghosts can be a very nice tool to show the lighting conditions in your pictures, this 70-300 sometimes flares and produces ghosts with a bright source of light in or just outside the frame, but is easily shielded by a hand and doesn't "glow out" like many new kit-lenses, which can't handle simple candles without loosing contrast. If used with a collapsible rubber-hood, as I do from time to time, it doesn't gain in size or weight and you have a shade, if you need one.
It's color reproduction seems to match my other Canon EF - lenses and is maybe a bit cooler than some of my older Sigmas.
Lateral CAs (purple/green fringes along high-contrast edges) are visible, but very well controlled, well below one pixel wide at all focal lengths.
Sharpness is one of the most overrated qualities of lenses. That being said, this lens is sharp. It's not perfect, but very good at every setting, with near to no detoriation when zoomed towards 300mm or towards the image-borders. No L-zoom is more uniform. Some have a slightly higher overall-sharpness-level, but not justifying at least three times the price IMO. Adding to that, this lens has very good overall-, as well as fine-detail-contrast, which makes it look even sharper. Great! This is better and, due to the high contrast, looks a lot better than Canons non-L 70-300.
Alternatives
There are lots of alternatives. The 70-200mm L - zooms, are all much more expensive but even better, also, in every aspect but weight. The Canon 70-300mm IS is worse in every regard, without fulltime-manual-focus-override, internal focussing and worse optics, but is a genuine lens, what has advantages in resale-value and probably service. The 70-300L is in a completely different price-class und isn't a lot better.
And finally the Sigma 70-300mm OS is garbage, in my opinion, as one of the very few lenses, I wouldn't use because of too low sharpness
For APS-C I'd buy a 55-250mm IS, as it sells for €65,- (!!!) used and is a really compact, light, sharp, contrasty and even quite fast focussing lens. And how wrong can you go for € 65,-!?
Recommended!
A word about supporting this site
I don’t run this site to earn money. I have a real job to earn my living with, a completely normal job. Since everything I write about here I have bought myself, for myself and with my own money from normal shops or ebay-sellers to actually use it, how much and what I am able to write about , depends on the amount of money that I can save and invest in equipment with good conscience. I share all this, because I want to, not to sell it. But when you find this helpful, maybe even as helpful as buying a magazine or book, of course you can support me, if you want. Your benefit is, that you help me being able to afford things to write about here.
You can use the “Donate” – button on the left to directly send a small amount of money (or a big amount, if you insist). You don’t need a paypal account to do so, every method is possible. If you decide to donate 99 cents, I’m thankful for it, because 10 people being as kind as you, make one new filter tested! The default currency is US $, but it works well with € or nearly any other currency, too.
But even more simple and without any cost or other disadvantage at all it is, to simply use this link to Amazon (or the one on the left) before buying anything there. For you it’s exactly the same as going there directly by typing the web-adress in your browser, you just klick this link first! It doesn’t matter, what you buy or where in the world you buy it, be it underpants, a pen, a cupboard, a lens or a Leica M9, be it in Germany, the USA, the UK or Australia: Amazon’s servers simply realize, that you came there through the link on my page and I get a small percentage of anything you buy FROM THEM. There’s absolutely no cost or other disadvantage for you, Amazon simply pays for my “advertisement” through this. I originally didn’t want to ever do any advertising personally. But then I decided to break this rule for Amazon. I’m a completely satisfied customer and buy everything from them. It’s the only shop in the world I would personally and on my private basis really rate a complete 100% in every regard. They have perfect service, even do call you back, answer emails with real, personal writing, extremely fast delivery even on Christmas-day, always perfect and completely new items, are never considerably more expensive than the very cheapest internet-sellers, have an extremely fast refund-system without being picky or having ever displeased me in any way and sell every good I have ever wanted to buy. They work on a completely different level than any retailer I have ever tried, and deliver it directly to me, without robbing me time and money to drive to the city or mall. I wouldn’t advertise them, if I wasn’t convinced, that it is OK to do so.