<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: REVIEW: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:55:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Photo Breakdown: Gemmy in Braids &#124; bo blog</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-6797</link>
		<dc:creator>Photo Breakdown: Gemmy in Braids &#124; bo blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:25:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-6797</guid>
		<description>[...] of confusion of  the longer focal length, I get more blur (BONUS! :p).  &lt;you can read my review of the Tamron 70-200 here).   Here are the lights taken at [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of confusion of  the longer focal length, I get more blur (BONUS! :p).  &lt;you can read my review of the Tamron 70-200 here).   Here are the lights taken at [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marco</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-5571</link>
		<dc:creator>Marco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Nov 2010 14:04:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-5571</guid>
		<description>Thanks a lot for your Review. Think i will buy this lens next few weeks as a combination for my Tamron 17-50 2,8.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks a lot for your Review. Think i will buy this lens next few weeks as a combination for my Tamron 17-50 2,8.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: qwark</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-4051</link>
		<dc:creator>qwark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:34:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-4051</guid>
		<description>I can recommend.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can recommend.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bo blog &#187; REVIEW: Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-3059</link>
		<dc:creator>bo blog &#187; REVIEW: Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2010 08:00:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-3059</guid>
		<description>[...] for Tokina!!! Instead of opting to save money and put in a lousy AF motor into the lens (read my Tamron blog), Tokina decided to stick with Nikon&#8217;s tried and true screw drive system. ie, the AF in the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] for Tokina!!! Instead of opting to save money and put in a lousy AF motor into the lens (read my Tamron blog), Tokina decided to stick with Nikon&#8217;s tried and true screw drive system. ie, the AF in the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bo blog &#187; Photoshoot RECAP: Crystal (pt-1)</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-3047</link>
		<dc:creator>bo blog &#187; Photoshoot RECAP: Crystal (pt-1)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2010 07:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-3047</guid>
		<description>[...] quick closeup to show off Siccola&#8217;s fabulous work.  This was taken with the Tamron 70-200 which proves the macro capability really comes in handy and also how damn sharp this lens really [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] quick closeup to show off Siccola&#8217;s fabulous work.  This was taken with the Tamron 70-200 which proves the macro capability really comes in handy and also how damn sharp this lens really [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Nichols</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-2259</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Nichols</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:28:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-2259</guid>
		<description>Very helpful review.  Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very helpful review.  Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bo blog &#187; Equipment and Lenses</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-1974</link>
		<dc:creator>bo blog &#187; Equipment and Lenses</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:59:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-1974</guid>
		<description>[...] about everything else, 3/4, headshots and closeups.   now if I want to do a bit closer up I use my Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 macro.  This lens is a slow focusing lens, but the copy I have is ridiculously sharp.  My comfort zone [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] about everything else, 3/4, headshots and closeups.   now if I want to do a bit closer up I use my Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 macro.  This lens is a slow focusing lens, but the copy I have is ridiculously sharp.  My comfort zone [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marco</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-1033</link>
		<dc:creator>Marco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 05:21:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-1033</guid>
		<description>Thanks so much with the reviews.  I&#039;m seriously thinking of purchasing this lens along with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens for wedding shoots.  Can anyone tell me if they have used these two lenses for a wedding shoot?  You can email your response to mji72@hotmail.com  thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks so much with the reviews.  I&#8217;m seriously thinking of purchasing this lens along with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens for wedding shoots.  Can anyone tell me if they have used these two lenses for a wedding shoot?  You can email your response to <a href="mailto:mji72@hotmail.com">mji72@hotmail.com</a>  thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bo</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-834</link>
		<dc:creator>Bo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:46:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-834</guid>
		<description>Hi Jay,

thanks for the comment.

My review about the image IQ is not &quot;completely opposed&quot; to that of dpreviews or others (I didn&#039;t even compare the IQ to the nikon or the canon!)  The IQ for the lens has its sweet points across the range and it is especially sharp when stopped down.  If you shoot it wide open at certain ranges it will not give crisp images (this can be solved stopping down).

My copy of the lens performs quite well up to 140 or 150, then it became quite soft.   I would suggest going back to dpreview and look at the MTF sharpness chart for the Tamron compared to Canon 70-200 2.8.  You will find that the Canon is sharper wide open at 100 and 135mm range.   And when compared to the Nikon 70-200 2.8, the Tamron lags behind wide open throughout most of the range.

Thanks.
-bo</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jay,</p>
<p>thanks for the comment.</p>
<p>My review about the image IQ is not &#8220;completely opposed&#8221; to that of dpreviews or others (I didn&#8217;t even compare the IQ to the nikon or the canon!)  The IQ for the lens has its sweet points across the range and it is especially sharp when stopped down.  If you shoot it wide open at certain ranges it will not give crisp images (this can be solved stopping down).</p>
<p>My copy of the lens performs quite well up to 140 or 150, then it became quite soft.   I would suggest going back to dpreview and look at the MTF sharpness chart for the Tamron compared to Canon 70-200 2.8.  You will find that the Canon is sharper wide open at 100 and 135mm range.   And when compared to the Nikon 70-200 2.8, the Tamron lags behind wide open throughout most of the range.</p>
<p>Thanks.<br />
-bo</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay</title>
		<link>http://www.boandbro.com/blog/2009/01/review-tamron-70-200-f28-di-ld-if-macro/comment-page-1/#comment-833</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 22:33:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boandbro.com/blog/?p=263#comment-833</guid>
		<description>Interesting review, except that your findings seem to be completely opposed to what I&#039;ve read from most reputable reviewers (DPReview.com for example).  They found that the Tamron is actually sharper than the Nikon 70-200 2.8VR and the Canon 70-200 2.8L IS.  In addition, they found the lens to be very sharp at f/2.8 and 200mm, definitely sharper than either the Nikon or the Canon.  Shame about the slow AF though.  I find the biggest flaw with many people who review lenses is that all the test images are taken at close focus within the confines of their living room.  Most lenses perform differently at close distances than at &quot;normal&quot; distances, especially wide-open.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting review, except that your findings seem to be completely opposed to what I&#8217;ve read from most reputable reviewers (DPReview.com for example).  They found that the Tamron is actually sharper than the Nikon 70-200 2.8VR and the Canon 70-200 2.8L IS.  In addition, they found the lens to be very sharp at f/2.8 and 200mm, definitely sharper than either the Nikon or the Canon.  Shame about the slow AF though.  I find the biggest flaw with many people who review lenses is that all the test images are taken at close focus within the confines of their living room.  Most lenses perform differently at close distances than at &#8220;normal&#8221; distances, especially wide-open.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

