Brent Rowlett Loc: Atlanta, GA

The Canon 24-70 and 70-200 were the first lenses I purchased giving me wide angle, portrait, and a little telephoto capability. For me, with a pro service account with Canon, you cannot beat a name camera brand lens, Canon servicing, and the quality of Canon L-glass. One sees all those white lenses at sporting events and the Olympics; those pros have an unlimited budget, and if the white lens is their choice, that is good enough for me. At least if I have a problem I don't have to mess with Australia or some other off brand country of origin. Canon gives me a loner Fed-Ex, fixes the problem or issue, and I don't skip a beat. When you are in business, that is worth the extra money.

Haymaker

No data?

dyximan

I often see people offering comparison websites for burying and comparable lenses. All though data can be seen as the written word, it cannot be relied upon to give you, the end-user what it is you consider an acceptable I Q. As only photos taken by the same camera with each lens can give you that information. But then I Q like data is only one aspect to be considered in my opinion. Is it fast is it in your price range is it weather resistant does it have stabilization etc.

double g Loc: Oklahoma

I've been shooting a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 for almost a year. It's a nice lens. Sharp images. Two points I'd make, and they are minor. First the lens is heavy. Second, the zoom ring and the focus ring are opposite of Canon lens. This takes a little adjustment, but in the long run it's fine. I shoot sports and equine events. Very happy with the results so far. I'd suggest you go to youtube and check out the comparison reviews to the Canon and Tamron 70-200 if you haven't already.

sailor2545 Loc: Victoria, BC

the most expensive is not always the best...a fool and his money are soon parted. research,,don't listen to die heart canon only users

gessman Loc: Colorado

Might want to watch this video as it pertains to the 70-200 class of lens before deciding: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jva08HY6uLE

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Rent both at the same time and then decide. I have a feeling that you'll go with the better of the two and that it will be the Canon lens.

RRS Loc: Not sure

Very good reply.

RRS Loc: Not sure

The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II is also a heavy lens and almost as heavy as the new 100-400 although not as fast.

Brent Rowlett Loc: Atlanta, GA

Consider Quality and Service when buying the lens. Cheaper is not always better either. When you purchase a Sigma or Tamron lens and you spend 6 months getting a repair from Australia etc., you will quickly learn the value of factory repair with warranty in a timely fashion and the fact that Canon sends you a lens to use while waiting. If you are an occasional user and weeks go by before you want to use your camera, buy the cheap stuff and save. If you are a pro, it is worth it to deal with Nikon and Canon.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

You've rented and tried the Canon (I assume the 70-200/2.8 II.... but they make four different ones)....

Why don't you rent the Tamron now, give it a try and see for yourself if it's performance and quality is up to your requirements?

I'm not a "die hard" Canon user... have several third party lenses in my kit. But when it comes to the 70-200s, Canon is pretty hard to beat. Theirs are real "work horses" used by a lot of pros. And Canon uses fluorite in all but one of the current models (the f/2.8 non-IS model, which is also the oldest design, doesn't use it). That's the icing on the cake, FL corrects chromatic aberrations better than any other type of glass. Tamron doesn't use fluorite in theirs. Nor does Sigma... they use "FLD" elements they call "fluorite-like". Nikon is the only other manufacturer using fluorite right now, recently converted many of their telephotos to use it. That includes their 70-200mm f/2.8 "FL", which at just shy of $2800 costs almost $900 more than the Canon 70-200/2.8 II (but, of course, the Nikkor won't fit and work on a Canon DSLR anyway).

The Tamron "G2" is quite well regarded... I like that in this and some other recent lenses that use tripod rings, Tamron has designed them with built-in Arca-Swiss quick release compatibility. That's a minor thing, but shows their attention to detail. I've used other Tamron over the years and have one (60mm f/2 macro) in my kit now.

But, you should rent it. In the end only you can say if it will satisfy you or if the Canon II is worth $600 more (but at least you aren't having to spend another $900 more for the Nikkor!).



The problem is... that video is 3 years old. So, while the Canon 70-200 being discussed is a current model, it doesn't cover the latest versions of either Tamron or Nikon lenses (not to mention, some of the other lenses, accessories and most of the camera bodies being discussed are out-of-date models now).

Smudgey Loc: Ohio, Calif, Now Arizona

Why would you change from the lens that you are already familiar with. Canon L glass lenses are amongst the best available. Stick with what you know.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Yep, I'd say that'd be a problem alright and I was a little hesitant about posting that url but I haven't gone digging for more recent information nor have I likewise heard that either Nikon or Tamron got that problem fixed with their latest 70-200s. Are you saying they have corrected the problem and that this information is invalid now that their new lenses are out? If so, perhaps Tony might be interested in knowing so he can pull that video from Youtube. My rational for going ahead and posting the url was that if Nikon and Tamron hadn't figured that problem out and corrected it by 2014 they probably still haven't - a little closed-minded of me, of course, and something I'm willing to negotiate.

Brent Rowlett Loc: Atlanta, GA

Exactly. And to protect your investment it smart to have your lenses periodically serviced, lubricated and cleaned. Canon factory offers that service for cameras and lenses. The other off-brands do not. I have seen some of the so called authorized repair/service companies with facilities not much better than your garage.

gessman Loc: Colorado

I did a little digging and generally, for what it's worth, found that the Tamron 70-200 G2, while improved, the max range still tends to go from 70 to around 180mm rather than to 200mm. Otherwise, there was little functional difference in the G2 and Canon 70-200 but again, the consensus is that the Canon was a bit sharper and overall just a little bit better in the minds of the 3 or 4 people who did comparison reviews of the two lens. And although it is not at issue in this conversation, as for the Nikon 70-200E lens, the latest, much, but not quite all of the focus breathing problem has been solved and it is generally conceded to be at least the equal of, if not slightly superior to, the Canon 70-200 in overall sharpness and contrast. Tony said that with this latest Nikon 70-200E lens he could justify switching from Canon to the Nikon D500 with no problem. So, in the case of the Nikon, the E lens is a vast improvement but the Tamron G2 is not quite so much and it would be a setback to switch from the Canon 70-200 to the Tamron G2.