Talk about ratcheting up the complexity! I’ve reviewed a number of TTArtisan lenses before, and they have mostly fallen into the categories that are filled by a lot of what I call “Boutique Third Parties”. These include various manual everything prime lenses with varying maximum aperture sizes. While engineering for larger apertures (like their F0.95 lenses) are more challenging, their newest lens adds a LOT of new moving parts. That lens is the TTArtisan 100mm F2.8 2X Macro Tilt/Shift (we’ll shorten that to TTA100M for this review).
Designing a lens that goes past 1:1 to 2:1 macro (2X) takes a lot of engineering. That’s twice as high of magnification as most macro lenses. Designing a tilt/shift lens takes even more engineering. I’ve never personally seen a lens that combines both of these elements before, so this is certainly a courageous move for TTArtisan, particularly since this is designed for full frame mirrorless mounts (I’m testing it on Sony E-mount, but it will also be available for Canon RF, Nikon Z, Leica L, and then smaller sensors like Fuji X and M43). This is also the longest focal length that TTArtisan has tackled to this point, which makes it a very interesting lens.
There are a variety of things that you can do with both ultra macro and tilt/shift, but it does mean that this is primarily going to be a “tripod lens”. Trying to do 2x macro work handheld (even with a camera body with IBIS) is very difficult, and all the moving parts of tilting and/or shifting are also going to be difficult to do handheld. If you take your time, however, you can produce some really unique photos with this lens.
I enjoyed playing with this lens in all the things that it can do, though in some ways its very ambition might be its greatest weakness, too. The TTA100M maybe tries to do too much, and all of the knobs and moving parts make for some ergonomic frustrations. At the same time, it must be acknowledged that this is a lot of lens for the money. This will be the cheapest point of entry for either a 2x macro lens or a tilt/shift lens that any of us have ever seen at about $400 USD, which in my mind makes this more attractive. You can judge for yourself by either watching my video review below or reading on to get the full picture.
Thanks to TTArtisan for sending me a pre-release review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the Sony a7IV along with the Sony Alpha 1 which will serve as my benchmark camera for the foreseeable future (my review here).
TTA100M Build and Handling
TTArtisan has produced one autofocusing lens at this point, but their lenses have primarily been manual focus only. That’s the case here as well, though it is pretty typical for tilt/shift lenses to be manual focus anyway. As noted in the intro, there’s a lot going on here, so let’s break it all down.
This is a full frame 100mm lens, and, as such, it isn’t particularly small. It has a long, slender profile that reminds me of the Laowa 100mm F2.8 2x APO Macro lens that I reviewed a few years ago. I weighed it at 841g (29.6oz) and measured it at 73mm (2.87″) in diameter (not including the protrusions of the knobs) and 147mm (5.78″) in length.
Like the Laowa, this is an internally focusing design (the length doesn’t change during focus), though you can see the elements moving forwards and backwards inside during focus. There’s several inches of travel inside. This isn’t a weather sealed lens, but many people do feel that an internally focusing lens has more of a natural seal because nothing is moving in and out.
There are knobs on each side of the lens near the lens mount. Two of these are adjustment knobs while the other two are for tension. For some reason on of the tension/locking knobs is shaped more like a lever, and I found it very hard to access when the lens was mounted on a tripod.
I tested the TTA100M on a Sony E-mount, and this particular lens design unfortunately plays into what is a real weakness for Sony bodies – namely that there isn’t a lot of room between the grip and many lenses. The E-mount itself is quite small for a full frame design, so often lenses have to flare out quickly after having to taper quite small at the mount end of the lens. That creates a bit of pinch for your knuckles between the lens barrel and the grip. In this case the lens doesn’t flare out, but it does have a tension or adjustment knob on every side of the lens, so there is always going to be something protruding and hitting on your knuckles.
There is a button that allows you to rotate the barrel of the lens about 90º, but because there is some kind of knob on each side of the lens, you will always have something in the way there. This will probably be less of a problem on Canon or Nikon where the bodies are a little wider and there is a little more room to play with for the knobs.
After the rotating section that houses the tilt and shift functions there is an aperture ring which can be controlled in half stop increments from F2.8 to F11 and then has single stops from F11 to F22 (minimum aperture here). Everything moves smoothly here.
In between the aperture ring and the wide, ribbed focus ring there is a hyper focal scale (with markings at F4/8/11/22. There’s also markings for the distance scale in both metric (marked in white) and Imperial (in yellow).
The wide focus ring has a nice damping and moves smoothly, though I did feel a very slight play/slippage. The focus throw is not as long as I expected at about 170°. I expected it to be a bit longer due to having a wide range of focus possibilities (the higher the magnification, the more potential focus possibilities).
There are several places near the front of the lens where threaded hole can accommodate screws to use in conjunction with a stabilizer.
Up front there is a very common 67mm front filter size. There is no included lens hood, and the lens is not bayoneted to receive one. The front cap fits over the lens barrel but is a tight enough fit that I see no potential for it to fall off.
My biggest complaint about the ergonomics comes down to the tilt and shift functions of the lens. It is very difficult to dial in just enough tension for making fine adjustments (particularly if gravity is working against you). The lens is long and has most of the weight beyond the adjustment portion of the lens, and so most of the time the lens just flops to the farther extreme point of the adjustment.
Further complicating this is that one of the tension “knobs” is more like a tension lever. It is very small and often hard to access…and definitely hard to dial in a moderate amount of tension for making small adjustments. As I said in the intro, doing a tilt/shift lens is hard, and there is room for growth in this area.
On the positive note, all of these adjustment knobs and levers are made of metal and don’t feel flimsy. I’ve used cheaper tilt/shift lenses before that had plasticky knobs that felt very vulnerable. I see 6mm of shift in each direction and 8° of tilt in each direction. That’s a bit less shift than what is offered by some lenses, though the TTArtisan lens is much, much cheaper than those lenses.
While the shift capabilities in a telephoto lens are perhaps less relevant for interior shots, I still liked being able to take a few vertical shots to stack together and get this shot of our music area in our home with great lines and details. This image is not cropped at all; this is how it came out after merging the images together.
I also enjoyed shifting horizontally to produce a unique, very high resolution macro panorama of these four screws.
Minimum focus distance is 25cm even at 2:1 macro levels, leaving you with a reasonable 9cm or so in front of the lens as a working distance. Not too bad, really, and 1:1 macro leaves you with a good 13-14cm of working distance.
Tilting is most often used for the miniature effect, but that is most useful in a city situation where you can be high up and look down on your subject (which I did not have the opportunity to do). It can also be used to interesting effect for depth of field, however, like in this shot of a chess board where I’ve created a plane of focus only on the head of the golfer.
You can also create an unusual amount of bokeh with the lens by using the tilt function. Here’s a shot without the tilt effect:
…and here’s one with the tilt effect:
All other settings are the same (aperture, exposure), so the vastly increased background blur is the result of tilting that area away from the sensor. An application of this could be for portrait work where you can create unique depth of field effects.
All in all, the build quality is quite good for a lens at this price point, but the ergonomics leave somewhat to be desired when it comes to the tilt and shift functionality.
TTArtisan 100mm F2.8 2X Macro Image Quality
I was very pleasantly surprised by the macro performance and sharpness of the very inexpensive TTArtisan 40mm F2.8 Macro for APS-C (my review here), and that skill carries on here. Even wide open at 2:1 macro levels, we have very strong detail and sharpness from the optical formula compromised of 14 elements in 10 groups.
Since I was reviewing a pre-release copy of the lens and the vital statistics are not yet published anywhere, I’ve had to do my own measurements and counts. I believe that I count 12 aperture blades, and these work very well to maintain a circular shape even as the lens is stopped down:
You can tell by this test that bokeh is going to be soft and creamy, which is always a very nice feature in a macro lens.
It also means that the TTA100M will double nicely as a portrait lens if you don’t mind manually focusing.
Important for macro work is the control of Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations (LoCA), and the TTA100M does a very good job here. You can see little fringing even on the very shiny surfaces of my subject here (the gears of a crescent wrench).
Of less concern on a lens like this is Lateral Chromatic Aberrations (LaCA) that show up near the edges of the frame, but we can see here that this isn’t a problem, either. I see no fringing in the bare branches along the edges of the frame in this landscape shot.
Typically macro lenses need to have fairly low distortion to be effective, and that’s the case here. Both distortion and vignette are quite slow even at F2.8, with a very mild amount of pincushion distortion (just a -2 to manually correct for in Lightroom) and a little over a stop of vignette (requiring a +36 to correct for).
That’s a great performance and means that in most situations you won’t need to worry about either issue.
So how about resolution and contrast? Here’s a look at my test chart. I’m using a 50MP Sony Alpha 1 for this test, and do my critical observations of chart tests at 200% magnification.
Here are F2.8 crops at roughly 175% magnification from across the frame (center, mid-frame, and bottom right corner):
Performance across most the frame is quite good, with good detail in the center and midframe but some serious drop-off in the corners. Wide open contrast is not amazingly strong, though, so there isn’t quite as much “bite” as one of Laowa’s Apochromatic designs. You can see it in this portrait shot, for example, which has a unique look that is slightly “dreamy” when viewed globally, though the crop shows that the actual detail on my model is quite good.
The payoff is that the bokeh is very soft and creamy, making this a unique portrait option. I shot this lens alongside the brand new Sigma 50mm F1.4 DN ART, and you can see that the Sigma result is higher contrast.
I don’t think that one approach is automatically better than the other – but they are different, and I think the rendering of each lens will probably appeal to different people.
Stopping the TTA100M down to F4 gives a contrast boost, and detail also increases basically everywhere save the extreme corners.
By F5.6 the results are excellent everywhere save the extreme corners, which are only marginally improved. Peak performance comes at F8 where the sharpness profile covers basically the whole frame, though the corners never reach the level of excellence found elsewhere.
Landscape images at these smaller apertures look good with fine detail all across the frame.
Perhaps more import is that macro detail is excellent at smaller apertures, allowing you to get nicely detailed macro shots.
I’ve used the TTA100M for a lot of my product shots during my review period, and it gave me a nice balance between detail on my subject and soft bokeh rendering.
I got some cool close-up shots of unique subjects like the tension knob on the tripod foot of this Fuji lens here.
Or how about this dial on the new Fujifilm X-T5?
I did feel the bokeh was pretty nice from the lens, overall, and you can see a lot of layers of focus here in this shot of a chess board:
These Christmas decorations also look lovely in this fairly close shot.
I saw a few signs that the lens could be a little flare prone in certain situations, and, since it doesn’t have a hood, you’ll need to keep an eye on that.
There’s a lot you can do with a lens like this, and, while I don’t love the ergonomics, there is no end to the types of photography you can pursue with a lens that does so much. In short, there really isn’t a lot to complain about optically here. You can check out even more photos by visiting the lens image gallery here.
Conclusion
There aren’t many companies that are making 2x macro lenses, and there also aren’t many that are producing Tilt/Shift lenses. Kudos to TTArtisan for tackling both with the TTArtisan 100mm F2.8 2X Macro Tilt/Shift lens. This was an unexpected lens from them, but while it has a few flaws, it mostly succeeds in some very challenging tasks.
Weaknesses mostly lie in some of the ergonomics. It isn’t easy to design a lens like this, and there are a few engineering shortcomings when it comes to adjustments on the tilting and shifting aspects of the lens. This is a lot of lens for the asking price of roughly $400 USD, however.
But if you’re patient, there are so many different kinds of photography you can do with this lens, and there is the potential to create all kinds of unique and interesting images. This is a lens that I’m definitely interested in experimenting with further, and macro lenses are one solid way to find some creativity during the long winter months. This very possibly may be your first experience with either 2x macro or tilting and shifting due to the lower price point, but if you’ll stick out the learning curve, the TTArtisan 100mm F2.8 2x Macro Tilt/Shift might just become your favorite lens.
Pros:
Excellent price to performance ratio
Very versatile lens
Nice bokeh rendering
2x macro
Internally focusing lens
Makes for a unique portrait option
Soft bokeh
Keeps nicely circular aperture iris
Tilting and shifting offers up many creative opportunities
Low distortion and vignette
Cons:
Knobs can be hard to access
Making fine adjustments to tilt or shift difficult
Contrast isn’t as high as some competing lenses
Corner performance never quite matches the rest of the frame
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Receive a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: TTArtisan, TTArtisan 100mm, TTArtisan 100 Macro, 100mm, F2.8, Tilt/Shift, T/S, Tilt, Shift, 2x, 2:1, TTArtisan 100mm Macro Review, Macro, Review, Telephoto, Action, Tracking, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a9, sony a7III, sony a7RIV, a9II, Sony Alpha 1, Sony A1 let the light in, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Talk about ratcheting up the complexity! I’ve reviewed a number of TTArtisan lenses before, and they have mostly fallen into the categories that are filled by a lot of what I call “Boutique Third Parties”. These include various manual everything prime lenses with varying maximum aperture sizes. While engineering for larger apertures (like their F0.95 lenses) are more challenging, their newest lens adds a LOT of new moving parts. That lens is the TTArtisan 100mm F2.8 2X Macro Tilt/Shift.
Designing a lens that goes past 1:1 to 2:1 macro (2X) takes a lot of engineering. That’s twice as high of magnification as most macro lenses. Designing a tilt/shift lens takes even more engineering. I’ve never personally seen a lens that combines both of these elements before, so this is certainly a courageous move for TTArtisan, particularly since this is designed for full frame mirrorless mounts (I’m testing it on Sony E-mount, but it will also be available for Canon RF, Nikon Z, Leica L, and then smaller sensors like Fuji X and M43). This is also the longest focal length that TTArtisan has tackled to this point, which makes it a very interesting lens.
There are a variety of things that you can do with both ultra macro and tilt/shift, but it does mean that this is primarily going to be a “tripod lens”. Trying to do 2x macro work handheld (even with a camera body with IBIS) is very difficult, and all the moving parts of tilting and/or shifting are also going to be difficult to do handheld. If you take your time, however, you can produce some really unique photos with this lens.
I enjoyed playing with this lens in all the things that it can do, though in some ways its very ambition might be its greatest weakness, too. The TTA100M maybe tries to do too much, and all of the knobs and moving parts make for some ergonomic frustrations. At the same time, it must be acknowledged that this is a lot of lens for the money. This will be the cheapest point of entry for either a 2x macro lens or a tilt/shift lens that any of us have ever seen at about $400 USD, which in my mind makes this more attractive. You can judge for yourself by either watching my video review below or reading on to get the full picture.
Thanks to TTArtisan for sending me a pre-release review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the Sony a7IV along with the Sony Alpha 1 which will serve as my benchmark camera for the foreseeable future (my review here).
Images of the TTArtisan 100mm F2.8 2x Macro T/S
Images taken with the TTArtisan 100mm F2.8 2X Macro T/S
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Receive a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: TTArtisan, TTArtisan 100mm, TTArtisan 100 Macro, 100mm, F2.8, Tilt/Shift, T/S, Tilt, Shift, 2x, 2:1, TTArtisan 100mm Macro Review, Macro, Review, Telephoto, Action, Tracking, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a9, sony a7III, sony a7RIV, a9II, Sony Alpha 1, Sony A1 let the light in, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
It was just a few months back that Laowa built on the foundation of the excellent Laowa 100mm F2.8 APO 2x Macro with a new and improved lens specifically designed for mirrorless mounts in the form of the Laowa 90mm F2.8 APO 2x Macro (which I reviewed here). Because it was designed for mirrorless cameras like Canon RF (which I tested), Sony E, Leica L, or Nikon Z, it was significantly smaller and lighter than the older DSLR design of the 100mm. I loved the 90mm F2.8 APO and actually purchased one myself. Laowa has continued in that same formula with another fantastic lens in this series with the new Laowa 58mm F2.8 APO 2x Macro (hereafter referred to as the Laowa 58M for brevity). This lens is only marginally smaller than the 90mm but comes in a focal length that is arguably even more versatile, good for macro, product photography, landscapes, and portraits alike.
I own (and love) the Voigtländer 65mm F2 APO Macro lens (my review here). There’s a lot of reasons that I really like the lens, but chief among them is that the shorter focal length works really well for all of the product photography that I do. It is the shortest of my macro lenses (I own both the aforementioned 90mm from Laowa along with the Irix 150mm F2.8 Macro), but sometimes the longer focal lengths are too narrow for doing effective product photography. Different focal lengths work better for different purposes. I tend to prefer a longer focal length for things like insects, where a longer working distance is really important. But if you need your macro lens to cover a lot of different possibilities, a shorter focal length is more desirable than a longer one that eliminates certain subjects.
Like its predecessors, the Laowa 58M is a fully manual lens without any electronics. That may immediately turn many of you off, but manual focus on a macro lens is far less of a penalty than most lenses. Many macro photographers actually prefer manual focus for the great precision it affords, and I can say for the most part really, really enjoyed using the Laowa 58M on my Canon EOS R5. There are a variety of reasons, but the first thing that stands out to me is the great viewfinder and LCD screen on the R5 that makes using manual focus lenses so much more fun. A really sharp lens like the Laowa means that focus overlays (I use focus peaking in red and set on the “high” level”) show up very crisply in the high resolution viewfinder, and I found that focusing in most situations (more on that in a moment) was really, really easy. I rarely felt like I had to magnify the image at close to medium focus distances, which meant that the focus process was very organic and quick. The crisp LCD screen means that high resolution, high contrast images like this lens can produce really just pop off the screen, which made my shooting time out in the field feel very rewarding. Finally, the addition of IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization) means even a manual everything lens like this gets decent stabilization (I manually input the focal length to get the best performance). Having a stabilized macro lens only adds versatility to this lens, and the Laowa 58M is exceptionally sharp and has very high contrast due to its Apochromatic (APO) design. Apochromatic designs allow colors to be focused more accurately/consistently, resulting in much lower levels of chromatic aberrations and thus higher contrast than typical lens designs. Images from this lens really “pop”!
The Laowa 58M macro combines that apochromatic (APO) optical design (typically seen on very expensive lenses) with a 2x macro ratio of 2:1 rather than 1:1 life size. The biggest drawback of my Voigtländer is that it only has a 1:2 (0.50x) magnification level, which looks like this if I photograph my Dad’s old Pentax:
Most macro lenses are 1:1 (1.0x) magnification, which looks like this:
But the Laowa 58mm is 2:1 (2.0x) and can achieve double that magnification level:
Laowa’s macro performance even at the 2:1 ratio remains very high, making this an extremely effective lens.
This isn’t a perfect lens (I miss not having any electronics in the lens), but it allows for an optical performance right up there close to Zeiss Otus range, has a (mostly) excellent build, 2x magnification, and a price tag of around $500 USD. That’s a lot of good things coming together in one lens…so this will definitely be a very tempting option for your Canon RF, Sony FE, Leica L, or Nikon Z mirrorless camera. You can get the full picture by either watching my video review below or reading on to get the full picture.
Thanks to Laowa for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the 45MP Canon EOS R5, which I reviewed here.
Laowa 58M Build and Handling
Laowa lenses have always been nicely made with full metal construction. That trend continues here, with the lens made entirely of metal and glass. The official measurements are 74mm in diameter (leaving a common 67mm front filter thread) and 117mm in length (2.91 x 4.6”). The bare lens weighs in on my scale at a moderate 1.24 lb (564g) despite the heavy grade construction. The lens has a very attractive, premium look and feel to it. It’s just a bit smaller than the 90mm, as you can see here:
The lens hood (as per usual for Laowa lenses) is the weakest part of the build, as it is very ordinary grade plastics and Laowa hasn’t been able to solve the bayonetting issue. The hood just doesn’t go on very easily or precisely, and the problem seems to be exacerbated if the front cap is in place. The hood is petal shaped, and thus much shallower than the hoods found on the 90mm and 100mm lenses.
The focus travel has a nice amount of rotation for precise focusing (about 200°). I found that I had enough room for accurate focus at various distances. The design is like the that of the 90M where the front element is a part of the lens design and protects the front opening of the barrel. There is forward and backward movement of the focusing elements within the seal of the barrel, but nothing moves externally during focus.
This lens does not have weather sealing, but the fact that it is internally focusing and has no electronics means that there is perhaps less risk of damage, though those of you who shoot in either very moist or very dusty conditions will probably wish for weather sealing.
Minimum focus distance focus is only 18.3cm (7.2″), and when you consider than the lens takes up about 13cm of that (there’s some extra length as that MFD is measured from the sensor of the camera), that leaves only about 5.3cm of distance to work with. The hood would take up a good bit of that, so you’ll definitely want to remove it when working at 2x magnification levels to eliminate the possibility of shading your subject with the hood. Here’s a look at the amount of magnification from my test chart subject (test chart shown a little later on) that you get at 2:1:
It’s worth noting that the laws of physics dictate that light transmission at close focus distances diminishes (effective aperture changes), and that’s even more obvious with the additional magnification of the Laowa 58M. Put simply, the image will get darker when you focus closer (think 2-3 stops). Very high magnification requires good light, so bear that in mind when doing serious macro work.
There is a manual aperture ring here with light detents at the full stops and a lot of room in between the early stops for selecting a partial stop.
The wide manual focus ring that is finely ribbed in metal. It moves smoothly for the most part but the copy that I reviewed had just the slightest hint or “rubbing” in the early part of the range. It was very faint, however, and might loosen up further in time. The weight is otherwise very good for smooth focus but with enough damping to achieve (and hold) accurate focus.
I found that focus was pretty simple at most distances, and it was only at landscape differences that I felt like I needed to double-check focus by magnifying the image, as I did see some false positives from focus peaking and the fact that a little adjustment makes for a big change at longer distances. The lens has a lovely feel for doing video focus pulls, with a nicely damped focus action that produces easily repeatable results. As with most macro lenses, there is some very obvious focus breathing at close distances.
We get a very high aperture blade count of 13 blades in the aperture iris, and that helps maintain a beautifully circular shape even when stopped down. The aperture makes for a fine photo subject itself:
The lens has a distinctive blue accent ring at the front of the lens, a 67mm front filter threading, and a lovely anodized metal finish that looks premium. I like the sculpted profile that flares out to the focus ring (making it nice to touch ergonomically), and the high contrast etched distance markings and aperture values make this feel like a premium lens.
The Laowa 58M has build quality that punches way over its price point of $499 USD. I’d like to see weather sealing, but that might be quibbling. I also would really like to see Laowa find a way to include electronic contacts on their lenses in the future so that basic EXIF information can be communicated. If that is too much to ask, they need to at least do a better job of engineering the bayonet action on their lens hood, as this strikes a really discordant note in an otherwise well built lens.
Laowa 58M Image Quality
Image quality is often an area of strength for an APO (Apochromatic) lens, and that’s true of the Laowa 58M, which may just be the best lens in the series thus far. A lens with an Apochromatic design has better correction of chromatic and spherical aberration than the much more common achromat lenses. Put simply, most lenses struggle with the fact that colors don’t always focus at the same distance, which results in green or purple (red) fringing due to the fact that those colors aren’t focusing on the same plane of focus. Whereas most lenses are corrected for two color wavelengths (typically red and blue), an apochromatic lens is able to bring three color wavelengths into focus on the same focus plane. This produces a near absence of chromatic aberrations and allows for higher contrast and a near absence of the veiling (lack of contrast) that produces “soft” images. True apochromatic lenses tend to be very sharp and very contrasty. They also are corrected for spherical aberrations on two wavelengths rather than one. I owned some excellent APO lenses, including the Zeiss Milvus 135mm F2 and the Voigtländer 65mm F2, and I’ve tested a number of other ones. Images with amazing “pop” like this are something I come to expect from lenses like this.
Longitudinal chromatic aberrations (LoCA) typically show up as purple/magenta fringing before the plane of focus and blue/green fringing beyond the plane of focus due to colors not being perfectly focused together. They typically diminish as the lens is stopped down to smaller apertures. The APO design here completely eliminated such fringing, though, which is incredibly important for good macro work. This shot, for example, shows the front of a vintage lens. I often find the transition from the etched white paint in the lens designation to the black of the lens barrel is a major hotspot for fringing, but that proves to be no problem at all here.
Lateral chromatic aberrations (LaCA) show up as fringing on either side of contrast areas (like tree trunks, for example) along the edges of the frame. Unlike LoCA, they do not improve when stopping the aperture down, but are much easier to correct for (typically a one click “remove chromatic aberrations” box in editing software). I saw no issue at all in the trees along the edge of this landscape image.
There is typically only one downside to APO lenses, and that is the intense contrast and lack of chromatic aberrations can have the negative impact of more hard edges in the bokeh (defocused) areas of the image. Some of the best “bokeh lenses” are those with some uncorrected aberrations, which help produce a softer, creamier defocused area. The trend generally remains true here, though frankly this lens is better than many in that way. This is the busiest I could get of the bokeh.
I did see a few prismatic artifacts in certain bokeh highlights, which was probably my greatest criticism of the bokeh from the 58M.
The reality with such a high magnification lens like this is that you can get close and completely blur out backgrounds very easily.
We’ll circle back to the bokeh with more shots in a moment, but let’s break down some of the optical performance. We’ll start with vignette and distortion.
There’s little to see on the distortion front. I had nothing to correct for in terms of distortion. Vignette was a slightly heavier than the 90mm, requiring a +38 (vs +33) to correct it. I didn’t feel the need to do much in terms of correction to real world images, though you can see a little shading in the upper corner in this wide open landscape:
So how about sharpness? Here’s a look at my chart globally at F2.8, taken with the 45MP Canon EOS R5:
And here are the F2.8 crops at nearly 200% magnification, taken from the center, then mid-frame, and then extreme lower right corner:
What I see is fantastic center sharpness, outstanding midframe sharpness (some of the best I’ve seen), and very good extreme corner performance.
These Laowa APO lenses are no “paper tigers”, either. The amount of detail and contrast you get in real world images is just fantastic:
Stopping down produces only marginal improvements across most of the frame, though you will see more noticeable improvement in the corners, where performance peaks at roughly F8:
Landscape images look amazing at apertures like F5.6 and F8, with all kinds of tiny details being finely resolved across the frame:
Minimum aperture is F22, though I would avoid F16 and smaller if possible because the effects of diffraction really soften the image. Your peak apertures will be F2.8-F11.
As noted, this is a very versatile focal length, and, unlike some lesser optical instruments, it performed very well at a variety of focus distances, starting with macro, as we’ve seen.
Move out a little ways, and the detail continues to pop:
At medium distances for portraits, the amount of detail on the subject is fantastic.
And then, of course, at infinity, the detail continues to be exquisite:
Bottom line is that Laowa 58M has some of the best image quality you are going to find at this price point.
I sometimes complain about Laowa colors on their wide angle lenses being a little “flat” for my tastes, but that hasn’t been the case with their telephoto lenses. I’ve liked the color from the 105mm F2 Transfocus lens, the 90mm and 100mm full frame macro lenses lens, the 65mm F2 Macro (for APS-C), and this 58mm lens as well. I find that Apochromatic lenses produce really intriguing color because of the deep contrast levels, and so images look great:
That punch also gives images a three-dimensional feel, where the subject really stands out against the background.
You’ve probably noticed from these images that the bokeh is actually pretty nice from the lens, and you can get close enough to subjects to REALLY make the background disappear…even if they are just a few centimeters away.
This image impressed me not only because the bokeh looks pretty good, but more so because the image was shot in the intense Arizona sun, and the final image was far better than what my experienced photographer’s eye expected at the moment of capture.
Following the trend that I’ve seen with all of these APO macro lenses, the Laowa 58M isn’t entirely flare resistant, though I think it is better than either of the longer lenses. I have found that the real world flare artifacts are more artistic here, though, with a flare (ghosting) pattern that is uniform and rather stylish.
Or how about this interesting prismatic effect from the sun filtering slightly into the frame?
I also found that when I put the sun intentionally into some shots (but around subjects), that the results were actually quite stunning.
A wider focal length like this is going have bright lights in the frame more than the longer telephoto macro lenses, but I don’t think that the flare performance is too bad here.
One thing I did note was that it was a little hard to get defined sunburst effects because of the high (and very rounded) aperture blade count. Not a huge deal, perhaps, but I didn’t want to note it.
All in all, however, this lens is an amazing optical performer for the price. There are few lenses that deliver better results on a technical level, and when I reviewed my images from my Arizona trip, I was really delighted with home many of them turned out. This is a great, versatile lens for the trail…particularly if you are shooting on a camera with in both image stabilization. If you would like to see more images, check out my image gallery here.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I’m delighted with the Laowa 58mm F2.8 APO 2x Macro. While it is very similar in many ways to the 90mm F2.8 APO 2x Macro, the wider focal length opens up a lot of different and unique opportunities. Very close macro is a little more difficult due to the closer working distance, but I do think that is compensated for by the versatility of the focal length for other subjects.
It is that versatility that makes this such an appealing option, much like my Voigtländer 65mm but with more macro capabilities. Macro still works very, very well here:
When you look at the price tag (about $500 USD) relative to the competing lenses, the Laowa really starts to feel like a great value, particularly if you tend to do your macro work utilizing manual focus anyway. Modern mirrorless bodies eliminate a lot of the sting of doing macro work, and you can’t argue with the kinds of results you can get from this lens. This is a top-notch value lens, and should be near the top of your macro list if you own a Canon, Sony, Nikon, or Leica mirrorless body and would prefer a slightly wider angle of view in your macro lens.
Pros:
Nice build quality in general
Apochromatic design at a low price
Twice the magnification of most competing macro lenses
Good contrast
Excellent chromatic aberration control
Colors have great punch
Excellent, consistent optical performance across the frame
Great real world macro performance
Good focus throw distance
Very flexible focal length
Cons:
Lens hood doesn’t fit well
No electronics or weather sealing
Some ghosting (flare) pattern in certain conditions
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Receive a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Purchase the Laowa 58mm F2.8 APO 2x Macro @ B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/3pKiwPc | Amazon https://amzn.to/3Cz92hf| Amplis Foto (use code AMPLIS52018DA for 5% off) | Camera Canada | Amazon Canada https://amzn.to/3PSpMTG | Amazon UK https://amzn.to/3TklFmf | Amazon Germany https://amzn.to/3ApiJfI
Keywords: Laowa 58mm F2.8 Macro, Macro, 2x, 2:1, APO, Laowa 58 review, Laowa 58mm Review, Laowa 58mm F2.8 APO 2x Macro, Full Frame, Review, Canon EOS R5, Canon EOS R3, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Canon EOS R6, Canon EOS R7, Canon R5, 45MP, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Sigma has produced perhaps more lenses than anyone over the past five years, but few of them are as important as the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 OS | Sport. Not only does this complete Sigma’s “trinity” of fast aperture zooms (14-24mm F2.8 ART, 24-70mm F2.8 ART), but there are few lenses more indispensable to professional photographers than a 70-200mm F2.8. Speaking personally, I can safely say that when I shoot weddings, events, and even portrait sessions a 70-200mm F2.8 is the first lens I reach for. The challenge for Sigma is that because this is such an important lens, a lot of lens makers have invested time and effort in developing good lenses in the class. Sigma doesn’t just face competition from Canon and Nikon, but Tamron’s excellent SP 70-200mm F2.8 G2 already provides a solid third party alternative at a fantastic price point. Sigma absolutely has to get this one right, as response to their 24-70 ART was somewhat tepid and many reviewers (including myself) declared the Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 G2 the better lens. Don’t expect Sigma to get outdone again, however, as the Sigma 70-200mm Sport is a serious, professional grade lens that is going to challenge everyone in the class on merit alone. The downside is that it is a (slightly) bigger and definitely heavier lens than competitors. The 70-200S is Sigma’s answer to the major players at this most important of focal ranges. But is it enough? Read on to find out.
Prefer to watch your reviews? Watch my thorough video review to get all the details!
Sigma 70-200S Build and Handling
If you want a nice, close look at the lens and its features, I recommend that you watch this video episode here:
Size and weight seems to have stopped being a consideration for Sigma about the same time as they switched to their new “Global Vision”. Their serious lens releases since that point have typically been the largest and heaviest in the class, and that’s no different here. 70-200mm F2.8 lenses have never been known for being petite, but Sigma delivers a lens that increases the weight over competitors by more than 300 grams. The Canon L III weighs 3.26lb (1480g), the Tamron G2 lens weighs 3.31lb (1500g), and the Nikkor ED VR lens weighs 3.15lb (1430g). The Sigma Sport? It comes in at a hefty 3.97lb (1800g). That’s nearly a pound heavier than the Nikkor lens. And, unlike the competitors, the tripod collar on the Sigma is not removable (it can be fully rotated but not removed), and so you can’t reduce that weight if you don’t need a tripod mount. I often shoot the Tamron 70-200 G2 without the tripod collar attached, so when I weighed it as I typically use it, it came out at 1387g. The Sigma tipped my scales (without caps) at 1812g; a little over its listed weight.
The 70-200S is also the longest lens in the class, though this is by a fairly tiny measure. It is essentially 8″ long (203mm), making it only a half millimeter longer than the Nikkor lens, 9.5mm longer than the Tamron, and 3mm longer than the Canon. Where the extra weight comes into play is more due to the diameter of the 70-200S. It is 3.71″ (94.2mm) in diameter and sports a larger 82mm filter thread (every other 70-200mm F2.8 lens I’ve used has been 77mm). All the other lenses are within a millimeter of each other in diamter, at roughly 88.5mm, making the Sigma nearly 6mm wider (which is accounted for in that larger filter size).
That’s the bad news.
The good news is that this is a very, very well made lens. It feels more professional grade than any 70-200mm lens I’ve used before. The Tamron G2 that I have on hand for comparison feels very well made. It is sleek and modern, but when I compare the two the lens the Sigma feels more “military grade”. It employs more of a flocked matte finish that seems highly resistant to either fingerprints or scuffing (something that the Tamron is less immune to). The feel of the rings are more robust. Sigma tends to give its Sport lenses the highest grades of build, and that seems very true here. The barrel is made from magnesium alloy, which is the same extremely tough material used in pro-grade camera bodies.
Included in the build quality is a thorough dust and splash proofing, including a rear gasket, internal seals, and coatings to the outer element surfaces to resist moisture and oils (fingerprints). These make the elements easier to clean, too.
One new design element that I’ve not seen previously on a Sigma lens is a locking mechanism on the lens hood. While I’m not personally convinced that a lock is necessary, I know that others do value this. I also noted that Sigma has done the best job I’ve seen with such a locking mechanism. It’s wide, easy to depress, and has nice mechanical functionality to it. The lens hood is nice and lightweight as well, and has other nice Sigma touches like a soft touch transition area and ribbed section that makes it easier to twist free.
Another new feature is the inclusion of a custom button on the lens (often reserved for very expensive super telephotos). This button is repeated on three sides of the lens to make it easy to access in multiple orientations.
There are various options you can assign to the custom button. On a Nikon body you can program this only through the Sigma USB Dock (and the Sigma Optimization Pro software). Since I have a Canon EF mount lens, that option is greyed out in the software, and the value is assigned in the Canon camera menu (see photo).
In my case, I programmed the button to switch between Single Shot and Continuous AF modes. This is really useful to me when I’m shooting events or weddings, as different modes suit different moments. I consider this a useful addition.
Also useful is the two custom modes included on the CUSTOM switch. These values are programmed through the USB Dock. I chose to program C1 to unlock the Faster Speed Autofocus option (more on that in a moment) and assigned C2 to a third OS (Optical Stabilizer) mode. Sigma allows one to choose autofocus prioritity (speed, accuracy, or the standard mode which tries to balance the two). Many have noted that the Speed option gives a bit more speed without any real accuracy cost, and that appears to be the case here. Speed is mildly faster and accuracy seems about the same.
As for the OS mode, I prefer Tamron’s approach where their VC switch has 3 different options. Modes 1 and 2 are fixed (standard and panning, as they are here on the Sigma), while Mode 3 can be programmed in two different directions (one video-centric mode which stabilizes all the time and a dynamic mode that focuses on stabilizing the final image without affecting the viewfinder much). Sigma has a similar mode to this, which I’ve programmed to C2, but I like Tamron’s approach better as it groups the stabilizer options together. Sigma’s approach means that you have to choose C1 or C2, so in my case I can have the faster AF option or the stabilizer option that I want, but I can’t have both at the same time. Still, having more options here is welcome, so kudos to Sigma for that.
I did find that using the programmable Mode 3 made a difference. I took these shots while being waist-deep in snow and with an outside temperature of -20C. The shot is 1/13th second at 200mm. In the first shot (one of about four with similar results), I used the standard mode (1). I could not get a steady result (a lot of motion blur). I switched to the Mode 3 that I programmed to C2, and got a much better result with my first try.
If you don’t need a super-steady viewfinder, this is going to give you the best final results. This is one area where Sigma lags a little behind Tamron, however, as the G2 is rated at 5 stops of assistance in this mode while the 70-200S is rated at 4 stops.
Other switches include controls for the OS, a focus limiter with Full and 3m-∞ options, and the control switch for the autofocus.
There is a distance window and various lens designations on the barrel. The closest ring to the camera is the manual focus ring, which is about an inch wide and has a high-quality feel to the rubberized materials. The ring moves fairly well for an autofocusing lens. The zoom ring is the farther ring, and I like the fact that there is a bevel mid-way through it that makes it very easy to find by feel. It’s about twice as wide as the MF ring, and the zoom action has a very precise damping that feels more professional-grade than the Tamron, which feels a little looser and more inconsistent by comparison. The 70-200S both zooms and focuses internally, so, while large, the outer dimensions of the lens never change in operation.
I’ve riffed on the tripod collar a bit, but I do want to balance that with some praise. The tripod foot is a little more robust than Tamron’s and also shares its Arca-Swiss compatibility, which is a big deal to me. Canon still neglects to do this at times, but it is so helpful to be able to just mount the lens on a tripod without messing with a quick release plate. Every tripod foot should have this compatibility. The collar also has easy-to-feel detents at the four points of the compass and the locking knob has a quality feel to it.
The 70-200S is compatible with, well, a lot of things. It works with the USB dock as mentioned, and is eligible Sigma’s lens mount conversion. It’s also (importantly!) compatible with Canon’s Lens Aberration Corrections, which means that JPEGs receive in-camera correction for Distortion, Vignette, Chromatic Aberrations, and Diffraction just like a Canon lens would. This is a definitely advantage over Tamron, and if you favor shooting JPEGs, it is huge! RAW files will need correction in post just like other lenses.
I’ve noted a secondary advantage for Sigma lenses that are supported like this. Because the camera accurately recognizes the lens, it means that certain lenses (like this one) play better with Canon’s own teleconverters. Both Sigma and Tamron make their own TCs, of course, and would recommend that you use them, but I’ve heard a lot of comments from my viewers that suggests that many photographers are uninterested in dropping another $400+ on a branded TC, particularly if they already own one for Canon or Nikon. The Tamron G2 lens does not play well with my Canon Extender 1.4x III, but the Sigma 70-200S works just fine. It reports fine, focuses fine, and produces good quality results.
In fact, the lens is also eligible with Sigma’s MC-11 converter, which means that 70-200S behaves better on a Sony body than any other non-Sony telephoto that I’ve used. It works fairly close to a native lens, which I certainly can’t say for the Tamron or Canon 70-200mm lenses that I’ve tested on it in the past. What’s more interesting, though, is that it also works fine with the Canon 1.4x III attached to the MC-11 and my Sony a7RIII. Autofocus continues to work fine (a little more hunting in difficult situations but otherwise good), image quality is good, and everything reports correctly save the lens designation (the lens now reports as DT 98-280mm F0 SAM). A small price to pay for that additional functionality! Here’s a few samples shot with that combination:
These are some real advantages over Tamron (and even Canon or Nikon) if they apply to you and further extend the value proposition of the Sigma.
If adding more size and weight to an already large class of lens doesn’t turn you off, then I suspect nothing else about this design will. This is one of the best built, best executed Sigma lenses that I’ve used.
Sigma 70-200S Autofocus
Before elaborating on autofocus in the native Canon EF mount that I’m reviewing here, I first want to reiterate that if you are looking for a lens to use on dual systems (Canon and Sony), the Sigma is most definitely the way to go. Sigma did a very clever thing when they introduced the MC-11 mount converter. It is a great adapter (my favorite, actually), in its own right, but more importantly, it has given Sigma lenses a “baked-in” advantage over all other lenses when it comes to adapting them to Sony bodies. It is fine-tuned to Sigma’s focus algorithms and they have been very proactive about keeping it updated. I’ve seen a steady improvement with the quality of focus that it produces with my non-Sigma lenses, but the advantage is even clearer when using Sigma lenses. Adapted Sigma lenses are the closest thing to native AF performance from a non-E-mount lens, and that’s certainly true here. When shooting in AF-C mode there is a bit of sound as the autofocus continually makes microadjustments (different focus motor than the typical mirrorless lens), and there is a little more sound even in AF-S for the same reason, but this is essentially true of all lenses without the stepping/linear motors more typically used in mirrorless lenses. The 70-200S focuses quickly and confidently on my Sony a7R3 body. Functions like Eye-AF are well supported.
Image quality with my a7R3 is unsurprisingly excellent. It has a great sensor, and the great resolution of the 70-200S pairs nicely with the camera. Take a look at the detail captured in this 100mm shot at F5.6:
Another thing I enjoy about using such a lens on Sony is that I have APS-C/Crop mode mapped to my C1 button, where at the press of the button I can switch to a cropped mode where I’ve got 300mm of equivalent reach at a still very useful 18 MP. Yes, I could achieve the same thing by cropping later, but often when shooting an event or something similar, getting the framing I want in the moment is more important. Take a look at this two orchid shots: one is in FF mode, the second in APS-C mode. Being able to make this choice in the moment is very useful, and you can see autofocus is nailed in them both:
The lens reports accurately on a Sony body in every way, and that further extends the usefulness when sorting and cataloging in Lightroom or Luminar’s library module. Here’s a few more Sony shots:
In the past I’ve frequently criticized Sigma lenses for inconsistent autofocus accuracy, but fortunately that has really changed in the past year. I’ve reviewed about 5-6 straight Sigma lenses that have shown markedly improved autofocus accuracy, and that includes the 70-200S. I address a minor front-focus tendency through a quick AFMA, and have had nicely accurate focus results since. This includes using points outside of the center group on my Canon 5D Mark IV.
I had good results in a portrait session as well, with good focus results on the face:
Autofocus speed (after enabling focus speed priority in the USB Dock) seemed roughly on par with the Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 G2, so roughly on par with competing lenses. This is a lens that is going to meet the needs of the average photographer just fine. If you are a professional sports photographer on the sideline of a major event, you might want to elect for the Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS III for the peace of mind in autofocus speed, but I’m not sure there’s much of a difference.
All in all, Sigma has done a solid job here with the autofocus. The HSM (Hypersonic Motor) gets the job done without any major missteps that I’ve spotted.
Sigma 70-200S Image Quality
Whenever I review a lens that has thrown out either price constraints or size restraints as a part of their design philosophy I tend to be a little more critical. Sigma has shown restraint with pricing on this lens, but they have given us a larger, heavier lens than competing lenses, so I feel that needs to counterbalanced by build and image quality gains. We’ve seen that this is true to some degree with the build quality, but how about the optical performance? I did a lot of direction comparisons of the lens with the Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 VC G2, which I consider to be the main competitor to the lens on either Canon or Nikon. We’ll break down my observations into two categories: Resolution and Rendering.
It should be noted that Sigma didn’t skimp with expensive elements in this optical design. There are nine top-grade FLD (Fluorite Low Dispersion) elements and an SLD (Special Low Dispersion) element in the optical path, which is the most complex of competing lenses with 24 elements in 22 groups.
I’ve observed that in the internet age people want clear-cut answers. They want to be able to Google “which 70-200mm F2.8 lens is the best/sharpest” and get a simple answer. As someone who spends extensive time with dozens of new lenses every year, I can safely tell you that this is rarely the true reality when testing modern lenses. The answer is inevitably much more nuanced. Is the 70-200S the best 70-200mm F2.8 lens on the market? After weeks of extensive tests, I can’t answer that question, but I can safely say that this is a truly excellent optical instrument.
Sigma 70-200S Resolution
The best way to view my findings as I compared the 70-200S and the Tamron 70-200 G2 is by viewing this video episode.
The first thing to note is that the Sigma actually shows a smaller amount of barrel distortion at 70mm than competing lenses. That’s very clear when compared with the Tamron:
While there isn’t yet a standard profile in ACR/Lightroom for the lens, I was able to easily manually correct for distortion and vignette, which makes it clear that the profile will be able to fix this easily:
My hope was that the larger diameter of the 70-200S along with the larger filter size would result in less vignette and better light transmission. I did not find that to be the case, however, for while there was some give and take, the Sigma showed roughly equal amounts of vignette as the Tamron (less at some focal lengths, more at others). The Tamron actually exhibited slightly better light transmission, too. The added complexity of the Sigma’s optical formula could contribute to that. Consider me slightly disappointed on this point, as I expect there to be a tangible tradeoff if I’m accepting more size and weight.
As I noted before, the end results when you look at the resolution are somewhat nuanced and can vary depending on where you look in the frame. At 70mm my conclusion was that the lenses showed a roughly even amount of resolution with give and take at different points in the frame. I do like the contrast better from the Sigma along the edge wide open. Stopping down a bit produces an uptick in sharpness and contrast to excellent levels all across the frame. Once again I slightly favor the contrast from the Sigma.
At 100mm both lenses are excellent in the center of the frame wide open but the Tamron is clearly stronger at the edge of the frame. Stopping down to F4 only widens the gap for the Tamron on the edge.
AT 135mm both lenses exhibit a very strong center performance (a theme across the focal range!) and a very strong edge performance. Stopped down they are roughly equal in resolution, but I slightly prefer the Sigma contrast:
Before moving on, let’s step back for a moment and consider just how good this performance is in the real world. It’s easy to get lost in pixel-peeping and the nth degree of comparisons without considering how good these lenses actually are. Here’s a real world wide open shot from the Sigma at 135mm along with a detail crop:
Pretty fabulous, no?
Moving on to 200mm is where I saw the biggest advantage for the Sigma (at least with the copies I’ve compared). In the center of the frame the difference is slight, with the Sigma showing a little stronger contrast and a tiny bit more resolution, but the difference is a little more pronounced on the edge. Stopping down closes the gap but the Tamron doesn’t quite catch up.
This advantage at 200mm also translates into better performance with a teleconverter attached. As previously noted, the Tamron does not communicate properly with the Canon 1.4x III attached. It acts like a 2x converter is attached for some reason. So, despite what the results say, this is at 280mm comparison at F4 for both lenses:
You can see the Sigma retains more contrast and a bit more resolution…plus it behaves properly. This would obviously not be a problem if I were using a Tamron TC with the Tamron, but the same would be true of the Sigma with the Sigma TC. I would argue that 200mm is the most important focal length in this zoom range, and a strong performance there is very important. That strong teleconverter performance further extends the usefulness of the 70-200S. This real world shot looks pretty great!
While I haven’t yet tested the Canon 70-200mm F2.8L III, I did spend extensive time with the Mark II while doing my review of the Tamron G2. To summarize my comparisons there and how they play out here, I would say that the Sigma is stronger than the Canon from 70-135mm and is roughly equal from 150-200mm. That means that the Sigma is competing at all tested focal lengths and is delivering arguably the most consistent performance across the range. So while Sigma isn’t “blowing away” any of the competitors in terms of resolution, it is the near the top of heap and represents essentially as good a performance as you are going to find in a zoom lens covering this focal range.
Sigma 70-200S Rendering
Beyond resolution there are still a lot of important considerations. In a second video episode I covered those other factors.
YouTube is prone to extremism. One reviewer or influencer notices something, makes a big deal about it, and that becomes the defining factor for a new piece of gear for a while until cooler heads moderate that reporting. That defining issue for the Tamron was “focus breathing”. In this context it means that the Tamron behaves as a lens with a much shorter focal length at close focus distances. It’s not until about 30 feet that the Tamron behaves like a true 200mm lens. One of the first questions I got about the 70-200S was whether or not it had the same issue.
It doesn’t.
It behaves similarly to the Canon or newest Nikkor lens (the previous model also struggled with this) with a near identical minimum focus distances and magnification. This is definitely my preference, though I will note a few areas of nuance here. With both lenses at their minimum focus distances you can see a notable difference in their degrees of magnification.
The Tamron can focus more closely, so if your subject is at the same distance (say six feet or a couple of meters), the amount of difference in magnification would be even more pronounced. Case closed, right?
For some, yes, but if you care to take a closer look, you find that the truth is a little more complicated.
First of all, the nature of the Tamron’s design means that while it has poorer magnification, it also produces better image quality at minimum focus distances:
The second truth is that the disadvantage on the 200mm end becomes an advantage at the 70mm. If you are in a room where you have limited space, you will find the Tamron the more flexible instrument. Look at this comparison at about nine foot away. The Tamron has about 25% more in the frame.
As I said, nuances. Still, in many situations the Sigma will have the advantage. At close to medium focus distances it will allow one to more strongly compress the scene, giving a more defocused background. Look at how lovely the defocused backgrounds are here:
I suspect that portrait photographers will prefer the Sigma for this reason. It will give more separation of your subject from the background at most portrait distances. It is definitely a lovely portrait lens:
Bokeh is a somewhat subject measurement, and I found the bokeh from the Tamron and Sigma lenses more similar than different:
I noticed a couple of minor differences. I do think that the Sigma grabs a few more hard edges at longer focal lengths, which is perhaps unsurprising considering that it has a little more contrast. Strong contrast doesn’t disappear in the defocused regions. The second difference is that I found the geometry of bokeh highlights gets a little more “squeezed” along the edges of the frame on the Tamron than on the Sigma, which is a positive for the 70-200S. The Sigma has a unique 11 bladed aperture to help keep bokeh highlights very circular, and it does a great job.
Chromatic aberrations are very well controlled. In field (real world) use, I didn’t really see any even in very high contrast situations:
All in all the Sigma 70-200S provides images with a lot of punch. It seemed competent for everything that I threw at it over my review period. If you’d like to see more images, check out the Image Gallery here!
Conclusion
Sigma is, in many ways, the latecomer to the party here. Tamron has released two generations of their 70-200mm F2.8 VC lenses since Sigma’s EX lens was released in 2010. Both Canon and Nikon have released newer versions of their own 70-200mm F2.8 lenses in that period as well. If Sigma had released this lens 3-4 years ago, it probably would have been heralded as the undisputed champ. In today’s market it is unquestionably still near the top in terms of build and performance, but Tamron’s 70-200mm F2.8 G2 is such a strong entry that the choice today is a little more complicated – particularly considering that the Tamron is an absolute bargain at $1299 USD. There’s no question, however, that the Sigma is also a strong value at $1499 USD. I feel that its build is a cut above that of the Tamron and every bit as good (if not better) than the Canon or Nikon versions. It’s performance is perhaps the most even of any of them, too, with no significant flaws that I could spot.
The Tamron SP 70-200mm F2.8 G2 is still the best value in the class, and I would choose it if I A) valued size and weight 2) didn’t plan to ever shoot it on Sony. If you are a Canon shooter and like shooting JPEGs, the fact that the Sigma has access to Canon’s corrections, works better with Canon teleconverters, and essentially lacks nothing that the more expensive Canon 70-200mm F2.8L IS III lens has makes it a compelling choice. If you want to also shoot your lens on Sony, don’t even think twice about it – the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 OS Sport and the Sigma MC-11 are the way to go. If you are a Nikon shooter, I can’t really think of any reason why one would pay the additional $1300 premium to go the Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8E VR unless they were seriously paranoid about third party lenses (are there still people that feel that way?) The only fly in the ointment here is the additional weight of the Sigma. But if that doesn’t put you off, I suspect that you will love this lens if you add it to your kit.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Sigma 70-200 Sport, Sigma 70-200 Sport Review, Sigma 70-200mm Sport, 70-200mm Sport, 70-200 Sport Review, 70-200mm Sport Review, Dustin Abbott, Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 OS Sport, Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 OS Sport Review, Sport, 70-200mm, Sigma, Sport, OS, 1.4x, 2x, Extender, Sigma MC-11, Sony, Canon, A7RIII, 5D Mark IV, Review, Hands On, Comparison, Test, Sharpness, Distortion, Chromatic Aberration, CA, Video Test, Video, Sample Images
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Sigma has produced perhaps more lenses than anyone over the past five years, but few of them are as important as the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 OS | Sport. Not only does this complete Sigma’s “trinity” of fast aperture zooms (14-24mm F2.8 ART, 24-70mm F2.8 ART), but there are few lenses more indispensable to professional photographers than a 70-200mm F2.8. Speaking personally, I can safely say that when I shoot weddings, events, and even portrait sessions a 70-200mm F2.8 is the first lens I reach for. The challenge for Sigma is that because this is such an important lens, a lot of lens makers have invested time and effort in developing good lenses in the class. Sigma doesn’t just face competition from Canon and Nikon, but Tamron’s excellent SP 70-200mm F2.8 G2 already provides a solid third party alternative at a fantastic price point. Sigma absolutely has to get this one right, as response to their 24-70 ART was somewhat tepid and many reviewers (including myself) declared the Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 G2 the better lens. Don’t expect Sigma to get outdone again, however, as the Sigma 70-200mm Sport is a serious, professional grade lens that is going to challenge everyone in the class on merit alone. The downside is that it is a (slightly) bigger and definitely heavier lens than competitors. We’ll examine in this review series whether the performance is worth the tradeoff.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Sigma 70-200 Sport, Sigma 70-200 Sport Review, Sigma 70-200mm Sport, 70-200mm Sport, 70-200 Sport Review, 70-200mm Sport Review, Dustin Abbott, Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 OS Sport, Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 OS Sport Review, Sport, 70-200mm, Sigma, Sport, OS, 1.4x, 2x, Extender, Sigma MC-11, Sony, Canon, A7RIII, 5D Mark IV, Review, Hands On, Comparison, Test, Sharpness, Distortion, Chromatic Aberration, CA, Video Test, Video, Sample Images
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
There are few lenses more indispensable to photographers as a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. Though large, heavy, and expensive, these lenses can be found in the bags of many, many photographers, both professional and amateur. They are just so versatile! They can do everything, from events to sports to portraits to landscapes to everyday capture. Look at the sidelines of any sporting event and you will see them. Ditto for most weddings. Tamron’s previous generation 70-200mm f/2.8 VC USD lens (internal code A009) was an excellent, underrated lens. Canon’s own 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II has long been considered one of the best lenses out there, period, and the fact that Tamron’s A009 was a bit sharper at many focal lengths (until about 140mm or so) and had an overall nicer rendering was met with some disbelief. While that lens has done reasonably well, it has never been a sales leader when compared to the first party lenses. It was mostly purchased by those that felt they couldn’t afford the more expensive Nikon and Canon versions. I suspect that Tamron’s newest offering, the SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 (the A025), will make a bigger splash for a few important reasons: Build, Image Quality, Focus, and Price. Of those four, Tamron had claim already to price and was competitive on image quality, but the first party lens had the advantage in build and focus quality. Has Tamron eliminated the first party advantages with the A025 (G2) lens?
Prefer to watch your reviews? I’ve got you covered! Check out my full video review of the new Tamron 70-200 G2 lens!
Build Quality
Tamron has really been impressing with their recent lens releases. There has been a shift away from budget “shells” around pretty good optics to now housing those optics in premium bodies. The new A025 is a great case in point, as the build grade is as good as the first party alternatives but in a sleeker, more modern finish.
I watched with interest as Matt Granger did his unboxing of the lens on YouTube (I hadn’t yet received one), and noted that his initial reaction to the lens was that it was smaller than the previous generation lens when in fact it is actually a bit larger. It is heavier (3.31 lb/1500g vs. 3.24 lb/1470g) and longer (7.6”/193.04mm vs. 7.41”/188.3mm), though both increases are minimal and the lens is still a hair shorter than the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L II (7.8”/198mm). But the sleek, modern design of the new lens makes it seem much smaller than what it is. I understand completely how Matt feels, as I had the same initial impression when unboxing the lens. It seemed smaller than expected, and that speaks to the sleekness of the new design. For practical purposes both increases are so incremental as to be unnoticeable, but for that very slight increase in length and weight we get major improvements in build and operation.
There wasn’t anything wrong with the build of the previous generation 70-200 VC lens (A009). It was mostly metal with a polycarbonate (engineered plastics) shell and I used one professionally for about 3 ½ years and just recently sold it. The lens still looked like new. But it did feel a step back from the heavier grade construction of the Canon version. The new lens (A025) is a nice step forwards, with a far more modern design and a fully metal body (a lightweight aluminum). I’ve been really impressed with the build of Tamron’s recent SP line, and this lens is no exception. It feels very nicely made, and the weather sealing has all been upgraded over the previous generation. There was a gasket near the lens mount on the A009 lens and a nod towards weather resistance, but the A025 takes weather resistance to a new level with the addition of internal seals throughout the lens along with an expensive fluorine coating on the front element to protect against water and fingerprints.
Lenses with this coating are much easier to clean and it provides some extra protection. The lens feels great in the hand, and looks much, much more modern than the four year development cycle between the two lenses indicates.
When compared side by side, the Canon 70-200L II definitely looks somewhat dated, with the Tamron looking far sleeker and more modern. The “Image Stabilization” gold badge on the Canon lens strikes me as garish and dated in particular( the 100-400L II in my collection looks similar at a glance but more modernized when viewed more carefully). Some people prefer the higher visibility of Canon’s white lenses, but I personally prefer the lower profile look of black lenses. The 70-200L II is a very well built lens, but in terms of pure appearance it “looks” cheaper” compared to the sleek, metal good looks of the A025. Design sensibilities across the board have changed and the 70-200 G2 reflects these changes.
The A025 has metal filter threads in the a very common 77mm size (shared with the previous gen lens and the Canon). Internally there 9 rounder aperture blades that retain a nicely circular shape when stopped down.
The zoom ring is located toward the front of the lens, and my preference is for the zoom ring to be the closer to the lens mount. This is unchanged from the A009, however, as is the fact that the lens the focus and zoom rings move in the “Nikon” rather than “Canon” direction. This latter fact is an issue for some, but not really one for me. I just don’t personally notice it in the field, so my mind must subconsciously make the adjustment. Perhaps using so many different lenses makes this a non-issue for me. The action on both rings is fine, with the zoom ring showing the nice smoothness common to internally zooming lenses. The damping is even and there are no sticking points, with the weight on the medium rather than light side (not really a “one-finger” operation). The zoom ring is slightly more narrow than the previous generation lens (though still nice and easy to find) and has a single ribbed design rather than the more complex pattern on the previous lens. The tactile feel is a little nicer, too. The manual focus ring moves smoothly, though as is usual with autofocusing lenses the feel is less precise and rewarding than that of a good manual focus lens.
I do prefer the feel of both of the zoom and focus rings on the Canon; both of them are nice and wide and move extremely nicely. So, while I prefer the look of the Tamron lens, I do prefer the basic ergonomics of the Canon. It is tried and true…and it shows.
The A025 has four switches rather than the two on the A009. The A009 had only the basics: AF/MF and On/Off for the VC. The A025 adds a focus limiter (always welcome) that allows you to choose between the full range of focus or to limit the focus from 3 meters to infinity (though this figure can be customized in Tamron’s Tap In Console Utility if you have the Tap-In Console).
On that note, let me say that I highly recommend picking up the Tap In even if you only use it apply firmware updates to the lens. This saves time (never have to send the lens in to Tamron to have the firmware updated, as I had to do twice with the previous generation lens) and also helps future-proof your lens. Beyond this, however, the Tap In opens the door to a good deal of customization of your lens, including tweaking the focus, setting the position of the focus limiter, changing the sensitivity of the manual focus override, and even selecting an additional VC mode. Beyond this you also have the ability to further tweak focus with either the new Tamron 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters attached (completely separate values for either combination).
Using the focus limiter can help give you a little extra speed when you don’t need to focus more closely than 3 meters (roughly ten feet). The A025 can focus down quite closely (only 3.12’/0.95m), so you are eliminating a number of focus points between this and 3 meters.
The fourth switch on the lens gives you a choice of VC (Vibration Compensation/Image Stabilization) modes. Position 1 is the standard, balanced mode that you will most often use. Position 2 is for panning and limits the compensation to one axis allowing you to smoothly pan without interruption from the VC. Mode 3 (by default) is what Tamron calls “Capture Priority”. It does little to stabilize the image in the viewfinder and instead prioritizes stabilizing the captured image. Tamron claims an industry leading 5 stops of stability in this mode (and in my tests it is the most effective mode), which is great, though those with shaky hands may find that stabilizing the viewfinder is worth too much to them to use this mode. By using the Tap In you can program this third mode to another option, which is “Viewfinder Priority”. This mode is really designed for video, and changes the behavior of the VC to prioritize smooth transitions for the VC coming on and off along with keeping the VC on a little longer to help produce smooth video footage.
The tripod collar has also received a redesign. It now has a different texture with a somewhat “matte” finish. As before it can be rotated (with markings for the four points of the compass)) but is also fully removable. This latter point is a big one to me, as I primarily use a lens like this handheld and often remove the tripod collar to save a little weight. A major improvement is to the foot itself, which is now Arca-Swiss compatible, meaning that on many tripods you can just mount it right onto the tripod without having to mess with a Quick Release plate or adapter. It’s one of those common sense touches that I’m always happy to see. I tested four lenses during this review cycles (two copies of the A025, one of the A009, and the Canon) and was reminded on multiple occasions on how much I preferred the tripod foot of the A025, which made going on and off tripods for tests a breeze, while I had to take the time to thread on a quick release plate for the A009 or the Canon (which if you leave on, makes everything that much more bulky and often means the lens won’t “sit” right.)
Like other recent Tamron releases the lens is designed in Japan but produced in Tamron’s plant in China. My copy of their 85mm f/1.8 VC was made in that same plant, and I’ve had good results with it, so my fears over moving the production out of Japan have abated somewhat. There’s no question that the new lens is beautifully built and has a gorgeous design. 70-200 lenses are workhorses, but there’s no reason why they have to be ugly! The new Tamron 70-200 G2 gives the Canon L lens a run for its money in overall construction and definitely trumps it in the looks department.
A025 Autofocus Observations
There’s no question that using Tamron’s Tap In Console allows one to produce a custom tuned focus result on your camera body, but be forewarned that it is also a fairly time consuming process. You have the option to calibrate the lens at three different focus distances (minimum focus, medium distance, and infinity) and at four different focal lengths (70, 100, 135, and 200mm). That is twelve different calibration points, so not something I would want to do all the time. It was a time consuming process to fully calibrate the lens, which I did.
Fortunately I found the lens’ behavior during calibrating very comforting, as it gave me repeatable results in multiple tests in Reikan FoCal (my calibration software of choice) and also showed a linear pattern In adjustments as I moved from 70mm to 200mm. That consistently bodes well for those without a Tap In console, as you should be able to get a good result even when just calibrating the lens at the two focal lengths (70 and 200mm) that most modern camera bodies allow for. The payoff for that laborious process was the lens has been exceptionally accurate for me in all lighting situations. I’ve used two different copies of the lens during this review period, and both copies focused very well for me.
Tamron has redesigned its USD motors with an additional microprocessor for added speed and accuracy (starting with the 85 VC). It shows in the increased performance of the newer lenses, which are now almost as fast as first party competitors. Almost…
Much like the 85 VC, I find the 70-200 G2 arrives quickly at the focus destination but then hesitates for a split second before locking focus. The Canon focuses at about the same speed, but without the final hesitation at lock, making focus acquisition that split second faster. The 70-200L II is well known as one of Canon’s better focusing lenses, so the fact that the Tamron stays close in both speed and accuracy is great to see for a third party lens. I tested the lens on a Canon 5D Mark IV, Canon 6D, Canon 80D, and then via a Metabones IV adapter on a Sony A7R II. Unsurprisingly the best focus system (5D Mark IV) gave the best results, with the increased voltage for focus making an obvious difference in “spool-up” speed compared to the 6D, for example. Focus was unsurprisingly the slowest on the Sony/Metabones combination, though, for what it is worth, I actually got faster results with the Tamron vs the Canon in that situation. On the DSLRs, however, I give the overall focus speed win to the 70-200L II, though the advantage is now very slight.
I used the lens on several different occasions in AF Servo mode and found the the lens had no problem making the continual minor focus changes necessary to track action. We are stuck here between seasons (March) with it too cold (and still too much snow on the ground) for fair weather sports, but with conditions deteriorating for winter sports, so finding a lot of good action to track has been a challenge. I do have a very active new kitten, though, and so I spent some time tracking his play (which is a definitely a challenge due to the tight quarters). Still, I felt like results were very favorable.
Focus isn’t as whisper quiet as Canon’s new Nano USM, but is quiet in a USM kind-of-way. There is a faint sliding sound on big focus changes, but everything is pretty quiet overall – about the same as the 70-200L II.
Over my review period I was extremely pleased with the focus accuracy of the 70-200 G2. This is one area that Tamron seems to have figured things out, and my focus consistency with the 35 VC, 45 VC, 85 VC, and now the 70-200 G2 is on par with the equivalent Canon lenses. I shot in a wide variety of situations and lighting conditions and was very pleased with the results that I got.
Teleconverter Performance
One of the shortcomings of the A009 lens was that it was (according to Tamron) not designed for compatibility with teleconverters. This was a competitive disadvantage, as Canon’s own lens is a very strong performer when used with teleconverters. Tamron has rectified that error here and designed this lens from the ground up with compatibility with its new line of SP Teleconverters. I had both the 1.4x and 2x converters on hand, and they, like the rest of the new lineup, are very sleek with metal construction and a weather sealing gasket near the lens mount. They seem just as nice as the Canon 1.4x III version that I personally own. You can view my detailed video review on the new teleconverters here.
In my internal conversations with Tamron representatives they stressed that Canon TCs should be paired with Canon lenses, and Tamron TCs with Tamron lenses. This proved true in a number of different ways. The A025 focused fine with the Canon 1.4x III that I have, for example, but the combination for some reason allows only a maximum aperture of [reported] f/5.6 rather than f/4 (using it on the Canon lens allows f/4). Ditto in the opposite direction when I mounted the Tamron 1.4x TC on the Canon lens. The maximum aperture will show as f/5.6, but the effective aperture is actually f/4. It’s a reporting issue. You will also get a few other reporting quirks: the Tamron 1.4x extender is recognized as the Canon 1.4x III on the camera body (and in software), while the 2.0x extender will almost never register correctly in terms of aperture (and perhaps focal length) when paired with Canon lenses. On a separate note, you will get a few quirks when pairing the TCs with the Tamron 150-600 G2 lens, but the behavior on the 70-200 G2 is pretty civilized.
I will deal more with the image quality in that section, but I will note that my Canon bodies registered the maximum aperture value correction with both TCs (f/4 with the 1.4x, and f/5.6 with the 2.0x) when paired with the 70-200 G2. What doesn’t always properly register is the new maximum focal length with the 2.0x; sometimes it will show 400mm, but other times it will still show the maximum focal length as 280mm. The reason for this is that the camera doesn’t always recognize that it is a 2.0x extender, and will often register the 2.0x as the Canon 1.4x III. Occasionally it will show 2x III and 400mm, but not consistently and I can’t see a pattern as to when it decides to record correctly or not. You are still going to get 400mm of reach (that doesn’t change), but that information may not register correctly in the camera body or the EXIF date.
In good light I saw little impairment with either TC, with focus speed and confidence seeming to be pretty much like with the bare lens. In extremely dim light I saw just a little pulsing where there was little contrast to grab, but it did lock focus accurately in the end. That’s a definite improvement over the A009. The focus on the A009 didn’t respond well to TCs at all. Mounting on the Tamron 1.4x extender on the Canon slowed it down a bit (particularly with big focus changes), but was usable. Mounting the Tamron 2.0x on the Canon 70-200L II didn’t produce a useable result. It mostly pulsed, and only after several seconds of pulsing did it decide to lock focus…even on higher contrast subjects. Switching back to the Tamron on Tamron combination was a night and day improvement.
I’m not a big fan of 2.0x converters, myself, as I feel they introduce too many compromises, but Tamron’s 2.0x does seem to produce very good optical results. 200mm is the weakest point optically in the 70-200 G2’s focus range, so unfortunately that is going to be reflected in use with TC’s (where you are often going for the greatest reach). Final results are good, but not as good as the Canon with it’s TCs (see more in the image quality section). It is worth noting the Tamron Tap In Console allows you to enter separate values for a lens with either the 1.4x or 2.0x attached, so if you plan to use a certain combination extensively you can invest the time to assure maximum focus accuracy and the best results.
It is worth noting that adding extenders definitely improves the maximum magnification figure of the 70-200 G2. The bare lens gives a magnification of right under 0.17x. Adding the 1.4x changes that figure to 0.25, while the 2.0x extender brings the magnification up to around 0.33x. That final figure is pretty close to the native magnification of the original Tamron 70-200mm, which tells me that it must have strongly breathed in the opposite direction (like the 70-200L II except more so!)
One final tip if you plan to use Tamron’s extenders with the 70-200 G2: I found stopping down one stop with the extenders attached gave a very nice boost in image quality. It is worth noting that a lot of early buyers are giving negative reviews to the Tamron teleconverters. It’s not because they aren’t good (they are actually excellent), but rather because Tamron’s promotional material has given some the false impression that people are going to get quality autofocus with the converters + the Tamron 150-600mm G2 lens…which isn’t true. This lens, yes, but not the 150-600 G2. Watch my video on the teleconverters to get the whole story on them!
Improved Image Stabilization
Tamron’s new VC works beautifully. It operates more smoothly than the A009’s VC, with smoother transitions on and off. I tested it using both Mode 1 (Standard) and Mode 3 (Capture Priority) at 1/25th second, 1/15th second, and 1/8th second. I also compared the Canon EF 70-200L II on its Mode 1 (it has only two modes and no equivalent Capture Priority mode). To make things more fair (considering the focus breathing of the Tamron and the target distance of about 10.5 feet), I tried to match framing and thus shot the Canon at about 168mm.
Lens (Mode)
1/25th (out of 5)
1/15th (out of 5)
1/8th (out of 5)
Tamron (1)
4.5 (1 slight blur)
5
2 (ish)
Tamron (3)
5
5
3 (Perfect)
Canon
4.5 (1 slight blur)
2.5-3 (ish)
2 Perfect – 3 close
Overall I was impressed with the performance of both lenses. In Mode 1 the Tamron does the best job of keeping the viewfinder steady, so if this is a big deal to you then the Tamron has an excellent performance. The value of Tamron’s Mode 3 (though it does nothing for the viewfinder) was seen as the shutter speed dropped. It delivered the most consistent results overall, though I will note than in the last sequence its worse blur was a bit worse than the Canon’s worse blur. I was surprised by the near identical performance of the Canon at 1/15th and 1/8th. It delivered pretty much the same results, which lagged behind the Tamron at 1/15th but pretty much matched it at 1/8th second. Both of these lenses have fantastic image stabilization, but just know that there are very, very few situations where I would recommend shooting at even 1/15th second shutter speed with a telephoto lens; the chance of subject movement is too high. For everyday shooting and typical shutter speeds neither of these lenses will disappoint.
Here are a few examples of the 70-200 G2 at 1/8th second in Mode 3:
In a quiet room with my ear near the barrel I can hear faint whirring with both lenses, with the Tamron registering as a bit quieter. Neither lens’ image stabilization produces enough noise to really be noticeable behind the camera.
70-200 G2 Image Quality
This is always an area of priority for a new generation of lens. As we have seen, Tamron has done a great job of refining the autofocus, build, handing, and image stabilization of the lens, but have they had equal success with the image quality? Let’s look at a number of different metrics to make that determination. I recommend that you visit the Lens Image Gallery to see many more photos than what will fit in the review. I’ve got photos with extenders, on APS-C, on full frame, and even via adapter on a Sony A7R II.
Sharpness and Resolution
Many don’t know this, but Tamron’s previous generation A009 actually had a minor optical edge from 70-135mm over the Canon 70-200L II, with the Canon 70-200 giving the better performance in the latter part of the range. What we are going to find is largely an expansion on that theme, where Tamron has built upon their existing strengths but not fully addressed their weaknesses. I used four lenses as a part of this test: two copies of the A025, the A009, and the Canon. You can watch my detailed analysis of the image quality in this video:
When comparing the two copies of the A025 I found that they performed pretty similarly, though one was a bit better centered than the other and gave a more even performance on both sides of the frame.
At 70mm the 70-200 G2 is the clear winner. It is crisp and detailed from corner to corner with very little resolution loss right out the very edges. There is no hint of haziness from a lack of contrast and no chromatic aberration at all. The Canon is fairly good in the center (though not as good as the A025). Sharpness is good but there is both more softness visible along with a hint of some purple fringing. Towards the edges of the frame is a different story, however, with details becoming blurred somewhat by both a lack of contrast and more pronounced purple fringing. Stopping down to f/4 allows the center of the Canon to almost catch up with the Tamron, but the Tamron edges are better at f/2.8 than the Canon is even at f/5.6. The A009 center at 70mm (f/2.8) is close to the A025, but the edges lag behind the 70-200 G2 in an apparent way.
A025 vs Canon, 70mm f/2.8 (left, center, right)
A025 vs A009, 70mm f/2.8 (left, center, right)
The situation is virtually the same at 100mm, with the Tamron 70-200 G2 show a strong win on the edges but clearly better towards the center, too. The Canon still suffers from some CA towards the edges. At f/4 the centers are pretty close but there is still an obvious edge for the A025 towards the edges. The same pattern from 70mm is true for the A009; it is fairly close in the center but lags towards the edges, so it is clear that on the wider end of the focal range Tamron has worked most at extending resolution towards the edges.
A025 vs Canon, 100mm f/2.8 (left, center, right)
At 135mm the race tightens a bit. Both the Tamron and the Canon show a near identical center performance. Towards the edges the Canon has managed to lose the chromatic aberrations that held it back at wider focal lengths, and while the Tamron still has a small advantage nearer the edges, it isn’t nearly as pronounced anymore. With both lenses at f/4 there is no real advantage to be seen for either one. Here’s a look at both sides:
I was also reviewing another (secret) lens at the same time, so I had an opportunity to compare both the A025 and the 70-200L II on the Sony a7R II via the Metabones IV adapter. I shot an outdoors comparison with the very high resolution a7RII at 135mm (or, in the case of the Canon, 140mm, as it is very hard to use the Canon’s focal length markers in the middle of the range to accurately set a focal length…they are always off by a fair margin). In this test (shots from about 90 feet away) there was some minor give and take across the frame but the Tamron was a slight winner overall showing greater contrast and texture resolution in more areas of the frame. The Tamron maintained its edge even with the lenses stopped down. I find it encouraging that the Tamron seems to shine when paired with a higher resolution sensor.
A025 vs Canon, 135mm f/2.8 (samples from across the frame)
The situation reverses at 200mm, however, and it is clear that the Canon is optimized for the long end; a decision that is hard to argue with. The edge advantage is minimal but apparent, with the Canon have showing more precision on the fine engraved numbers on my vintage lenses that I use for these tests. The chromatic aberrations are long gone, and contrast is strong. In the center the difference is roughly the same. The Tamron is good, but the Canon is better. The lenses are closest on the right side, but I still slightly prefer the Canon’s performance. This isn’t taking anything away from the Tamron, as it is delivering a great performance, but when you compare head to head (as I did) you will find that the 200mm results show a slightly softer result for the 70-200 G2. There’s a bit of “haze” due to reduced contrast and slightly less resolution. Through f/5.6 the Tamron never really “catches up”, either, as the lenses are really closest wide open. When I compared the A025 at f/2.8 and f/5.6 I found that the results were pretty much the same with perhaps a slight edge for the f/2.8 result. The A009 was about as good in the center at f/2.8 (as the A025), but the edge results showed a slight advantage for the A025.
A025 vs Canon, 200mm f/2.8 (left, center, right)
A025 vs A009, 200mm f/2.8 (left, center, right – bottom third of the frame)
Here’s a look at a few other comparisons at 200mm shot on the Sony a7R II. The infinity shot strongly favored the Canon, but a medium distance shot (tree trunk) seems to slightly favor the Tamron, which shows that out in the real world there are a number of factors that ultimately impact resolution. The final shot is from the infinity shot at 200mm stopped down to f/5.6, which shows parity between the lenses.
When the stars align, however, you can get stunningly sharp results from the 70-200 G2 even at it’s weakest point: 200mm, f/2.8. This is a crop from a much larger image.
I did a similar series on APS-C (Canon EOS 80D). While the trend was similar (Tamron delivered a stronger performance through 135mm with the Canon the better at 200mm) I noticed two significant differences. First was the fact that the Canon almost always matched the performance of the A025 in the center of the frame but not the edges. The center performance of the Canon was surprisingly good through the focal range even in the focal lengths where its edge performance waned. I also noted that the chromatic aberrations were less pronounced on APS-C, which isn’t always the case. I’ve tested some lenses that showed little CA on full frame but a lot on APS-C, so you just never know how a lens will handle that transition. The 70-200 G2 shows no chromatic aberrations on either full frame or APS-C. Both lenses perform well on APS-C, but relatively I think the Canon does better. Its optical weaknesses on the wider end are mitigated somewhat on APS-C, while its strengths (center of the frame and on the telephoto end) remain strong. If you are an APS-C shooter I think the Canon is the better choice optically. But if you are buying the 70-200 G2, there’s no reason to not use it on APS-C. Here’s an example:
Canon and Tamron have two different points of emphasis in their optical design. The Tamron provides a more even performance across the frame and throughout the focal range, but the Canon is optimized for the telephoto end. Which approach is better will really depend on your shooting priorities. I find it very hard to call either lens the winner in this category, as they both have clear wins at different ends of the focal range. Neither will disappoint optically.
The Canon being optimized for the 200mm focal length also means that it performs better with extenders attached. 200mm becomes 280 and 400mm, respectively. The Canon remains impressively sharp with either a 1.4x or 2.0x extender attached. The Tamron 70-200 G2 also does well with either extender, but the edge sticks with the lens that has the stronger 200mm performance (since the point is more reach), which is the Canon. The Canon has a second advantage with the extenders at short to medium distances, which leads us to…
The Focus Breathing/Maximum Magnification Issue
Tamron’s first 70-200 lens set the bar very, very high in the magnification and focus breathing metrics. They had Macro in the name, and while that was a little ambitious, it did achieve a very impressive 1:3 (0.32x) maximum magnification ratio at the minimum focus distance of 3.12′ (95 cm). It was extremely useful for closeup shots, and could obviously completely blur backgrounds at those kinds of distances. The A009 was a much better lens in almost every way (MUCH faster autofocus, better build, and the inclusion of VC), but it also took a major step backwards in this department to a disappointing 1:8 (0.125x) maximum magnification ratio at a minimum focus distance of 51.2” (1.3 m). The problem? Tamron jammed a LOT more complexity (5 more glass elements in 4 more groups, a true ring-type USM motor, plus a brand new Vibration Compensation system) into a lens that was actually both shorter and narrower. Close focus is achieved with space (the elements moving away from the sensor), but with less space available something had to give. I had owned the older Tamron 70-200 lens briefly and appreciated the “macro” qualities, so it is this area that I was most disappointed in the newer VC lens (A009). When I heard the rumor of A025’s announcement I stated that this was one of the primary areas that I was looking for improvement in.
Consider this a good news/bad news report. The good news is that pretty much everything is improved relative to the A009, but nowhere near the level of the old 70-200. The minimum focus distance is definitely improved, and is now identical to that of the first generation lens at 3.12’ (95 cm). Wow! We should be back to that great magnification figure, right?
Not so fast. The old lens didn’t negatively “focus breathe”. Focus breathing occurs when the lens uses some of the focal length space to achieve closer focus. It’s a compromise to cram more optical performance into a similarly sized lens. So while the A025 can focus down as closely as the old lens, it is still a more complex optical machine with even more features crammed into a lens of similar length (it gains 5mm over the A009). While the lens is a true 200mm at medium focus distance to infinity, near minimum focus it behaves more like a 165-170mm lens, so the maximum magnification ratio is 1:6.1 (0.163x). Definitely a more useful figure than the previous generation lens (0.125x), but nowhere near the 0.32x of the old 70-200 nor even as good as the Canon’s 0.21x (achieved at a minimum focus distance of 3.94’/1.2m). Here’s a visual comparison with the Canon and with the A009
Some improvement, yes, but not as much as I’d hoped. The good news is that the lens gives an exceptional performance at minimum focus and the ability to focus down closely is very helpful not only for tight headshots but also shooting details at weddings or events. The Canon can’t focus as closely, but it also doesn’t focus breathe (at least negatively), so it is even better in these types of situations.
You can see my video on the focus breathing issue here:
At distances short of infinity the framing between the A009 and the A025 is virtually identical (see the sharpness comparisons above), so Tamron’s focus breathing problem hasn’t gotten worse, and it is competitive with most lenses, but it doesn’t fare well compared to the Canon.
I set up a test with a tape measure to compare focus breathing at 6 feet, 12 feet, and 18 feet. I shot with the Tamron and 200mm first, setting up my test subjects to almost touch the edge of the frame at both sides. I then zoomed the Canon out until I get near identical framing with it. At six feet I needed to zoom back to 146mm before I got equal framing, which indicates a significant amount of focus breathing at six feet (relative to the Canon).. At 12 feet the Canon was zoomed to 168mm. At 18 feet the Canon was at 182mm to achieve the same framing. Space limited my moving further in my studio space, but you can extrapolate that by 24 feet framing should be pretty close. When I shot at infinity I found the framing to be the same with both lenses.
When I released a video on this topic there were a number of people that directed me to tests that show that the Canon is actually longer than 200mm at close range (it breathes in the opposite direction and is more like 220-230mm), which exaggerates this difference. At close distance the Tamron probably behaves more like a 165-170mm lens in an absolute sense (considering that the Canon breathes in the opposite direction). That being said, however, the Canon is the primary competitor (at least for Canon shooters), and so that remains an area of strength for it when compared to the Tamron.
What does this mean? It means that at close focus distances you produce a tighter head shot, for example. This comparison was shot at the same difference and both lenses set at 200mm:
It means that backgrounds will be more blurred because of great focal range compression. The only potential upside that I can see is that if you are situation where you are trying to fit more in the frame (and have no room to back up), you can actually get more in the frame with the Tamron than the Canon, as the Canon “breathes” in the opposite direction and frames tighter than 70mm at closer focus distances – as this photo shows.
Some have recently intimated that this was a “third party” problem, but that’s not true at all. Every new Canon telephoto zoom that I have reviewed recently has exhibited focus breathing, including the EF-S 55-250 STM, EF-M 55-200 STM, EF 70-300 IS II, the 70-300L, and the otherwise incredible 100-400L II. In fact, when I compare the 70-200 G2 + 2.0x @ 400mm to the 100-400L II @ 400mm I find that they frame very similarly (the Tamron is a couple of millimetres wider). Note that due to a reporting quirk it shows 280mm rather than 400mm for the for the 70-200 lenses + 2.0x combo.
The Canon 70-200L II with the same 2.0x converter (400mm) frames noticeably tighter (see the second photo above). Among the newer Canon offerings the older 70-200L II is actually the exception to the rule. The trade off with the 100-400L II is that it focuses down incredibly close (3.5’/0.98m) and has an incredibly useful 0.29x. It focuses down much closer than the lens it replaces (5.9’/1.8m) to achieve a near 50% increase in reproduction (0.20x for the older 100-400L).
I’m afraid that this is a part of modern lens design that tries to pack ever more complexity into similarly sized lens bodies. Photographers have complained in the past about not being able to focus closely enough, so many modern lenses work to solve that problem by reducing minimum focus distance (and allowing for great performance at minimum focus). The downside is that the focal range at shorter distances (from six to twenty feet) often gets compromised by some focus breathing. This seems to be the new norm for many modern lenses. That being said, Nikon received so much flack over a focus breathing on their 70-200mm VR II lens that this was one of the primary areas they addressed with their new 70-200mm FL ED lens…though they also set a new price floor for the lens of $2800, which is a $700 premium over the older lens!
In summation, while focus breathing has become a hot topic, the reality is that Tamron has lost nothing here over their previous generation lens (one that I got next to no comments about over focus breathing!) but has added the ability to focus much closer and improve the maximum magnification figure by almost 25%. If you have decided that focus breathing is a big issue for you, then spend the extra money on the Canon or a LOT more money for the Nikon 70-200 FL ED lens if you are a Nikon shooter. If you don’t want to spend the money, then just enjoy the lens and the amazing images it can produce.
A025 Vignette
Using the A009 and the Canon as benchmarks, I found some give and take across the zoom range. At 70mm (and f/2.8) the two Tamron lenses look fairly similar, with a little less vignette on the A025. One trend that I did notice is that I don’t think that the vignette extends as far into the frame and seems to be slightly more linear. It’s subtle, though, and I don’t see any radical improvement. The Canon essentially only has shading in the extreme corners. The extreme corners are a hair darker than the Tamron, but the vignette intrudes further into the frame on the Tamron. Light transmission in the center of frame very, very slightly favors the Tamron.
At 100mm the A025 is the clear winner, with only the mildest of vignette in the extreme corners. The Canon has taken a step backwards with noticeably darker corners and a vignette that extends further into the frame. The light transmission in the center of the frame more noticeably favors the Tamron. The A009 was also strong at 100mm, though the A025 is slightly better. Light transmission seems a hair betteron the A025.
At 135mm things shift again, with the Tamron 70-200 G2 (A025) showing darker extreme corners than the Canon. The vignette on the Canon (though mild) does extend a little further into the frame. Light transmission is better on the Tamron. The A009 is a bit worse, with a shade darker corners and the vignette comes a little further into the frame. Light transmission is similar with perhaps a slight edge to the A025.
At 200mm the story is similar to 135mm. All three lenses vignette a bit more heavily at 200mm than 135mm, but the pattern is similar. The Canon shows less vignette overall in the corners, but the vignette on the A025 doesn’t extend as far into the frame and is nicely linear. Light transmission in the center definitely favours the Tamron. If you are shooting JPEGs with the Tamrons you won’t have the option of using the “Peripheral Illumination Correction” in camera, so the JPEG end result will favor the Canon, but this doesn’t impact RAW shooters. At 200mm I definitely see better light transmission for the Tamron and its modern design (see sample below).
All in all, while there is some give and take, there is some mild improvements for the 70-200 G2. It exhibits a bit less vignette overall, the vignette doesn’t creep as far into the frame, and light transmission seems to be improved and is the best in the group that I compared.
Bokeh Quality
Bokeh rendering is always a subjective evaluation, and while I always evaluate lenses with a Christmas light type test (bright bokeh “balls”), I do want to stress that there are some lenses that I don’t love in this type of situation that I think are great in the field. There are usually three major things I evaluate when doing the Christmas light test. 1) Examine the busyness within the bokeh circle 2) Evaluate how soft the transition is (inner line) and 3) Examine how circular the bokeh circles remain across the frame. Here’s what I found when comparing the Canon 70-200L II, the 70-200 G2 (A025), and the Tamron A009.
The Canon has slightly less busyness in the bokeh circle, with the two Tamrons showing about equal amounts. The 70-200 G2 has the softest inner line and transition out of the circle (a big metric, as this often determines how soft defocused areas will be and if hard edges will show). The Canon and the A009 are roughly equal in this metric. None of the lenses maintain a circular shape of bokeh highlights across the frame. The A025 maintains a larger area where circular highlights remain round, but also produces more pronounced “lemon” shapes around the edge.
I’ve been very pleased with real world bokeh from the 70-200 G2. I’ve not seen any ugly bokeh in transition zones, and I feel like the lens would work well for events and portraits. I don’t find that 70-200mm lenses are quite as exceptional in this area as the better prime lenses, but the A025 is as good as any I’ve used.
Flare and Ghosting
Any lens that will be used as a portrait lens will most likely face some backlighting. One of the great weaknesses of the otherwise exceptional Canon 135mm f/2L is that it would completely lose contrast and wash out when the sun was either in the frame or right outside it. I compared the Canon and the Tamron 70-200 G2 with bright, directional evening sun, and discovered that the Canon definitely washes out a lot. Veiling fills a good part of frame with some loss of contrast, and I also got a ghosting pattern. Not great. This comparison represents worst case scenario.
The Tamron retained contrast better, and has less veiling, though when stopped down I found the ghosting pattern fairly pronounced. I would say that the more modern coatings of the Tamron do better, but I would still encourage caution of where you place the sun in the frame with any of the lenses.
Chromatic Aberrations
This is one area where the 70-200 G2 really, really shines. I shot hundreds and hundreds of photos in a wide variety of situations and don’t recall seeing a hint of chromatic aberrations anywhere. The Canon also gives a strong performance at 200mm, but up to about 150mm it definitely suffers from chromatic aberrations. The overall clear win in this area goes to the Tamron, which, so far as I can tell, has eliminated chromatic aberrations fairly completely for field work. Here’s a photo where CA should show up but doesn’t!
Color Rendering
When I compare the two generations of Tamron lenses I’m reminded of the difference between the 150-600 VC and the 150-600 VC G2 lenses; the color rendition has completely changed. I set a custom white balance to eliminate that from the equation and shot JPEGs to get equal processing. The end result clearly shows a warmer result for the G2 lens with a slight tendency towards a green hue rather than blue one. In this shot the background is actually a light grey color, so I would be hard pressed to say which is the more accurate color rendition.
For what it is worth the A009 lens and the Canon look more similar in color, while the color rendering of the 70-200 G2 and the Canon 100-400L II look more similar to each other. In real world shooting I’ve been very pleased with the color rendition of the 70-200 G2…but I also shot for years with the A009 and was happy with the color rendition from it. I suspect that the differences will mostly only be realized when placing the lenses side by side. I recommend that you take a take at my extensive image gallery and judge for yourself whether or not you like you like the color rendition. This looks pretty good to me!
Conclusion
There’s a good reason why Tamron has far more buzz over this G2 lens than they did over the previous generation lens. It was a very good lens, but the A025 is basically better in every way than the A009, which, shockingly, includes price (in most markets). In the US, for example, the A009 retailed for $1499 a few months ago, but the A025 (with all of these improvements) actually comes to market at $1299. While that isn’t “cheap” in an absolute sense, when you compare it to the essentially $2000 price tag for the Canon 70-200L II and the nearly $2800 for the Nikon 70-200 FL ED it becomes one of the great bargains of the year. Autofocus accuracy is exceptional, though the slight edge on focus lock speed goes to the Canon. The image quality is improved across the board from the original and is clearly competitive with the first party offerings.
The new generation of Tamron’s Vibration Compensation is smoother and even more effective, and now comes with multiple options of how you can tweak the behavior. The build quality is first rate, and full compatibility with Tamron’s new extenders helps add versatility to the lens. I appreciate the improvement in minimum focus distance and magnification, but the breathing at close distances still limits that metric and stands as one of my disappointments. The second is that I feel like Tamron could have done a better job at optimizing the arguably most important focal length of 200mm. There are still reasons to choose the first party options, but no longer can you call those lenses the clear winner. The Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 VC USD G2 lens has closed the gap on many fronts and is yet another reminder that the third-party lens makers are now a force to be reckoned with.
I owe a debt of gratitude to Tamron Canada for providing retail samples of the 70-200 G2, 70-200 VC (A009), lens, and the extenders for this review, and to Simons Camera for providing the Canon 70-200L II to compare them too. B&H Photo provided the Sony A7r II and Metabones adapter. Shopping with these great people is a way to reward them for their kindness.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52016DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Ever since the announcement of the new Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 VC USD G2 lens I’ve been excited to get my hands on one. That was particularly true when I started having conversations with industry insiders and heard some exciting reports of how good it really was. Now I get to determine that for myself, and I’m looking forward to potentially upgrading to this lens and using it for myself. Keep your eye here to see the images I capture all the way with my review copy, and watch for my final analysis. Take a look at this video where I take a first look at the 70-200 G2 (A025) and break down the design elements and upgrades over the previous generation (A009) lens.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52016DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Sigma just announced a bunch of new, exciting products at Photokina. You can go ahead and get your preorder in on any of these by clicking the link below…although most of these products still don’t have prices attached to them.
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Neewer NW-ETZ vs Megadap ETZ21 Pro | Sony E to Nikon Z Adapter Showdown 
Neewer NW-ETZ Sony E to Nikon Z Adapter Review 
Megadap ETZ21 Pro Sony E to Nikon Z Adapter Review 
Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 Gallery 
Sony 85mm F1.4 GM II vs Sigma 85mm F1.4 DN 
Sigma 500mm F5.6 DN OS Sport Review 
Sigma 500mm F5.6 DG DN OS | SPORT Gallery 
Sigma 10-18mm F2.8 DN X-Mount (40MP) Review 
