NEW Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 G2 REVIEW vs Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II 

agree on this 100%!

Are you still with the Tamron?

@entremontanas7614 yes I am. I have a 70-200mm and a 24-70mm. Both pro series. They still represent excellent glass at a more reasonable price. That said, I do also have some Canon L series glass. I especially love my 100mm f2.8 macro L. No question that Canon's glass is well made and high quality.

glennskitchen hahaha! Glad we edited that part out...

too funny

Lol

I shot weddings with the G0 back in the day.

This happens when Canon advocates pretend to do a review of something, anything else. I was in a Nikon/Canon "church" all my life, and was arrogant enough to even try to acknowledge that other companies actually catched up and surpassed those two. I was suprised that even Tamron recently did it as well. Me and my friend, we both were nothing but hardcore Canon fans, but last 2 years we moved to Fuji and Panasonic camp, and we are never coming back. Canon stopped truly innovating long time ago, and since then they just been sleeping on their own laurels, slapping their logo on barely changed products, and increasing the price tag. Just like Google did with their Pixels. Another friend of mine, who is retired press photographer, said that 90% of people in the industry shoots with Canons/Nikons. It is like everybody is driving Audi's and VW's - all pictures look the same, not matter who took it. Because everybody shoots from the same positions, with the same 5D Mark IV's, with the same 20-700's. He said: "-One of the reason I got higher rates is because my equipment wasn't "mainstream", and editors always seek for that little edge of difference, that Canon doesn't have anymore". So, that's your answer. The same is happening in Video world, as well as with software: Adobe is Canon, in the way, that's why so many people (including me, after 17 years of using Premiere) are moving to Final Cut Pro and Resolve. There's just simply too much oblivious, ignorant people that are refusing to acknowledge that the change is not coming - it already did, and long time ago.

hey Taylor, big fan of yours !!!

Taylor Jackson that combo is like when you put Darth Vader in a movie....you must be very selective or you run the risk of drowning out the content. Having said that, I'll talk to Toby about when he'd like to feature my new look, "Blue Steel".

I used the MC-11 Adapter and it performed terribly - I would call it broken, briefly would try to AF and then give up. I didn't really expect it to work well though. I was not able to test a metabones adapter.

PhotoRec TV The Mc-11 mostly works well with just the SIGMA lens. That's what Tony Northup noticed too.

Thx. That's to bad. I don't understand why Tamron would not at least release this in an Amount version. Especially with the A99ii being released. It's to bad. FE mount would be great as well. I had the 70-200GM from sony but the image quality at least on my copy did not justify the price tag so I returned it. Really want that extra stop of light for indoor sports like basketball.

Terry Grube that is wrong! I had both mc-11 and MB and with all my canon lenses it worked as good or better than the MB so I sold the MB. I am an actual user day to day unlike Tony

That's actually not what I generally experience - I have this video and for most common Canon lenses the Sigma works fantastically and it is what I recommend. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jWlhmL2NQWE.html

Dennis Rongo Resale value, build quality and full compatibility with Canon cameras. I have the Canon version and once the lens fell off from my back pack, into a concrete floor (height about 1 meter) and surprsingly nothing is broken. If I'm looking for a budget, I won't mind buying Tamron. I love my Tamron 17-55 f/2.8 so much.

Honestly it seemed pretty consistent through out the shots. Going back through our tests shots it looks like it performs a little better at the wider end but the difference is slight.

It is a FANTASTIC shot.

Watching the videos, I saw perhaps just as many shots from the Tamron as from the Canon. Meanwhile, the direct comparison is just what I need.

😫😁😫😁😫😁😫🤘🏽🤣🤣🤣

Hugo Herrera Buy the Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 L (Non IS)

You definitely want is the f4 is crap wether its gen1 2.8is get it

Broken - Tries to AF briefly and gives up - this is with the SIgma MC-11 adapter, I didn't really expect it to work. Might be better with Metabones but I haven't had a chance to try.

Thanks so much, that's bad I don't really understand why these third party lens co.s don't make glasses for Sony when it is coming up...

József Csorvási o

Yes but the difference is minimal Canon weight - 1490 g (3.28 lb) Tamron weight 1500 g (3.31 lb)

Thank you so much for your 'instant' response.

Actually I ordered a replacement and even the second copy has the same sound. The sound is more audible when I keep the filter-side down (Camera side up) and try to gently tilt/move the lens by say around 5-10 cms. If I hear from upclose, then I can hear a sound of something kinda rattling inside (maybe its the movement / play to accommodate for the Vibration Control VC) I dont know what it is, but I am preety nervous about it.... and Wanted to check if that's normal. Ive tried to use it, it focuses and works perfectly fine...just that this minor rattling sound is bothering me. I dont know If I should send it back or keep it. Ive already sent the first one... :(

I think you are just hearing the VC system

PhotoRec TV maybe you are right. hopefully it's just the VC system.

PhotoRec TV thanks a ton for your time and effort to reply back.

I used the MC-11 Adapter and it performed terribly - I would call it broken, briefly would try to AF and then give up. I didn't really expect it to work well though. I was not able to test a metabones adapter.

No - It is slow AF but I 1/2 press for AF before I start filming and all is fine - works great for me.

Thanks for answering :)

Edu O. Induro legs with Really Right Stuff BH55 ball head.

Its an excellent DSLR

The latest version of Tamron 70-200mm is a serious contender in the 70-200 range. Check out this video watch?v=_alz95t7rPU

I used the MC-11 Adapter and it performed terribly - I would call it broken, briefly would try to AF and then give up. I didn't really expect it to work well though. I was not able to test a metabones adapter.

Honestly I am not sure you need the 35mm f/1.4 if you have Sigma 18-35 f/1.8. they are so similar. I think you might like the 50mm f/1.8 instead or the 50mm f/1.4 from Sigma. Same with pancake 24mm unless you just want a tiny lens to travel with.

@@photorectoby well you're right my sister gave me the sigma 24mm 1.4 and the 18-35 for my birthday so now my mother is a professional photographer and she told me to get the 24-70 f2.8 from tamron so that's going to be my next lens i can't wait that's my mother's favorite lens and it never comes off her camera so i need to get one as well. i won't buy the 35mm thanks for schooling me

Are you sure it is the G2 version?

i just found that its not G2 ... $1300/- G2 here ...

bhmstore.com/lenses-flash/1585-tamron-70-200mm-f28-g2-lens.html

That is really frustrating!

That's Steves point- the ZOOM ring is easy reach on the Canon. On the Tamron it is the AF ring that is easy reach and the zoom is further.

Good point!

For sure. A used one is only 250 -300 less for a good condition lens. Considering the lens could be 7 years old and still holds 80% of its value is fantastic.

B&H Photo - AND they include freebies and no tax outside NYC bhpho.to/2msOMDm

sir is that brand new

PhotoRec TV who don't love freebies lol

No, it is only 200mm, not more than that. This is a fact.

Tony Northrup mistook it for 225mm and he later corrected his error in judging the canon 70-200 IS II saying that it is not what he originally thought, but 200mm only. You can check his videos. Thanks.

Hey Ron, We missed the mark on this one - I have found it difficult to actually teach on workshops AND create proper reviews at the same time. I have backed off trying to create reviews while on tour and just gather data and spend time really thinking about the value. That said I do think valid points were made.

About filling the frame much more... I don’t think that is true.

It is True the focus breathing only happens under 2meters and the Tamron has a much better minimum focus distance which makes up the difference and then some for the breathing it does around 2meters away from a subject I own the g2 @@lukazupie7220

Twilson Tony Northrup made a comparison and canon was capable of bigger magnification, so for now i will trust him over you, sorry:)

luka zupie his comparison was with the g1 not the G2 and you keep taking advise from a guy that said shooting JPEG is for pros not Raws lol sorry you are wrong and misinformed completely.. check Matt grangers RU-vid on the G2 he compares to the 200 f2 and the G2 even beat that in minimum focus distance which closed the gap and passed it with any focus breathing under 2meters from the subject.. like i said i own the lens and know what I am talking about

Twilson you are right, tony was testing older version. Sorry about that. Anyway, you still don’t get 200mm compression, which is i would guess for most people more important than maximum magnification.

but if you buy the canon now and use it for , lets say 5 yrs , you will have like a 12 yrs old technology. i don't know man... we need a new 70-200 canon