p.1 #1 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
Hoping someone can help me here.
I bought a mint boxed canon 70-200 2.8l IS (mk1) about 3yrs ago. It’s fine but not tack sharp wide open. The whole point of lugging this beast is for its 2.8 aperture otherwise might as well just grab the smaller, lighter f4 version.
Anyway been offered the Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 Excellent Condition, Boxed 17 mths old for less than half what Canon version ii sells for used.
I am very tempted, but can anyone say for sure that the Tamron will be a huge improvement over my current lens.
p.1 #3 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
I have the Canon 70-200/2.8 L IS which I bought brand new maybe in 2006. I'm extremely happy with the IQ and AF performance. I normally shoot wide open with it. I don't know about your copy but personally I won't make this trade. Mainly because since Tamron is a third party lens, the AF might not be as fast and or accurate as an OEM lens albeit an EF lens. Besides if the sharpness is an issue, I can always use Topaz Photo AI. Having said all of these, if you are still curious about the Tammy, can you try it out?
p.1 #4 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
I've never shot the canon 70-200 so I cannot say for sure. I went with the Tamron G2 due to the price + the comparison on TDP that jcolwell posted places it better than the Mk1 and more similar to the Mk2 Canon.
The AF speed has been good enough for following my dogs around and feels pretty snappy. I made this quick video a long time ago to demonstrate AF speed very unscientifically:
I've been pleased with it and I got it for about what you are mentioning. Half the price of the canon MkII so it has been a great value from that perspective.
Apr 06, 2023 at 04:31 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #5 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
Dustin Abbott does pretty deep dive vs 70 200 2.8 IS v2. G2 does great:
p.1 #6 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
Thanks for the replies
Just to clarify I’m still keeping the canon too.
I went ahead a bought the Tamron, should be here next week.
I don’t use the 70-200 enough to justify buying the MKii canon version and if I did I’d probably pay a little more and get the mkiii instead.
I quite like the idea on non white tho, have to say. The white lens thingy has gotten old. I’m not one that likes to draw attention to myself and walking round with a big fat white zoom does exactly that.
p.1 #7 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
The first IS 2.8 is probably the worst of all the Canon 70-200s. The non-IS 70-200/2.8L is sharper. The IS II and III (optically the same except with different coatings) are even better.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Tamron is sharper, but wouldn't selling your IS 1 and getting an IS II be cheaper than buying the Tamron? Plus, the Tamron zooms backwards from Canon lenses, which would drive me crazy.
p.1 #8 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
I was wondering if you did try to micro adjust the camera with lens. Maybe it’s off by not much but just enough to be insatisfied to sharpness wide open. Here a video on Youtube about it: www.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D3kQ3lAqyt3o&usg=AOvVaw0M8th6LwKwv0yTYPEs3W6f
p.1 #9 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
Pixelpuffin wrote:
Thanks for the replies
Just to clarify I’m still keeping the canon too.
I went ahead a bought the Tamron, should be here next week.
I don’t use the 70-200 enough to justify buying the MKii canon version and if I did I’d probably pay a little more and get the mkiii instead.
I quite like the idea on non white tho, have to say. The white lens thingy has gotten old. I’m not one that likes to draw attention to myself and walking round with a big fat white zoom does exactly that.
Hear hear about white vs. black lens. I might consider the Tamron too. My EF 70-200/2.8 L IS is fantastic but in some situations it might beg the question from stadium security, 'hey buddy where is your press pass?' I'm even considering taping the white portion of my lens. I wish Canon would release the EF version of 200/2.8 L in RF, that would be my first RF lens.
p.1 #10 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
jojib wrote:
Hear hear about white vs. black lens. I might consider the Tamron too. My EF 70-200/2.8 L IS is fantastic but in some situations it might beg the question from stadium security, 'hey buddy where is your press pass?' I'm even considering taping the white portion of my lens. I wish Canon would release the EF version of 200/2.8 L in RF, that would be my first RF lens.
Most (probably all) professional sports venues forbid fans to bring cameras with removable lenses, regardless of barrel colour.
p.1 #13 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
In my experience, the biggest difference in IQ between the 70-200/2.8L IS Mk I and Mk II, is in the areas away from the centre; both are very sharp in the central area. In comparison with the Mk I, the Mk II is noticeably sharper right to the edges and into the corners, which makes the Mk II an excellent choice for landscapes and other situations where this is important. For many situations, like portraits or any images with a central feature that you want to see as separated from the background, it doesn't matter.
The Mk II also has better IS, faster AF, and a better hood, but that's not so important.
p.1 #14 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
@ Al Goldis The Tamron was £350 I couldn’t get a mint, boxed 17mth old canon mkii for 3x that price, plus it’s still white.
I have the 45mm Tamron which has really surprised me - the damn thing is so sharp hence taking the plunge on the G2. Pretty sure I’ll get my money back if I decide to sell on.
I do have the EF 200/2.8ii which is superb (plus the EF 135/2) but I’m getting old and becoming increasingly reliant (lazy) finding IS a godsend. Besides I honestly don’t envisage me using the Tamron much at all.
My go to camera is the gripped 5diii with ef 100-400ii. The only time I wish for 2.8 is late evening when I’m trying to keep the shutter speed high without boosting iso too much.
As for micro adjust…. Honestly I don’t want to go there if possible. I have a lot of camera bodies crop/ff M/R I like being able to grab whatever takes my fancy.
I’m also excited to see just how good the Tamron is, the canon is known for being bitingly sharp.
As for my current 70-200/2.8, away from max aperture it becomes very sharp, just wide open at 2.8 it’s a tad soft BTW I’m pixel peeping at 100x if I just fill the laptop screen with the image it looks amazing, but start zooming and it shows it’s age.
I’ve also picked up the 1.4xiii to use with the 100-400ii
Not sure which body yet, might try it on the 6dii or 7dii or the RP, whichever gives the most pleasing results.
p.1 #15 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
jcolwell wrote:
Most (probably all) professional sports venues forbid fans to bring cameras with removable lenses, regardless of barrel colour.
It depends on the venue. Here for tennis (tune up for the US Open) I was able to bring my gear in. Last year I had the APSC Sony A6600 and 135/1.8. I've seen a few people with their D850 and 70-200/2.8 lenses. One guy I sat with had A9+ white 70-200/2.8 GM. He said security asked a few questions but he was able to bring the gear in. I also attended the US Open a few years ago and I brought my 5Ds + 24-105/4 L IS bare, I didn't bother bringing a bag since it was a sunny day.
p.1 #16 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
Update :
The Tamron arrived today
WOW!! I honestly wasn’t expecting anything like this. Fantastic build quality. The VC is surreal. AF is fast, so FAST.
I finish early on Fridays so will plan a outing to try it out. Just need to decide which body to use.
p.1 #17 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
Typical it’s raining !!
But I had the chance to check the lens in daylight.
Oh My…..🫢
I feel bad for the seller as I think he sold it too cheap (£350)
It’s currently on Amazon @ £1471
The one that arrived is simply like new, I cannot find a blemish anywhere, I’ve scrutinised the rear rubber gasket for traces of wear… nothing. Shining a high powered Cree flashlight through shows a couple of dust specks, my 100-400Lii by comparison looks like it’s been used to hoover the carpet!! Yet still delivers pin sharp results- hence I’m not concerned about a few specks of dust.
The Tamron came complete with everything, box, case, booklets, hood, genuine caps.
I’ve tested it indoors on my M6ii, 5diii and RP worked flawlessly on each. The VC is astounding, I had to turn it off and take a couple of pictures to prove to myself it was actually working. I can’t hear it, nor see it in action.
Wide open @2.8 it literally wipes the floor with my old canon 70-200/2.8is in every respect, faster AF, superior IS and improved IQ wide open.
p.1 #19 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
Whisle wrote:
I have this lens also and the 24-70 2.8 G2 which is equally amazing.
That 24-70 must be a hell of a lens. It costs a fortune new. The irony is that it’s fetching more than canons equivalent 24-70 used.
I have the 100L macro, but I’m now chomping at the bit whether to grab the Tamron version instead. The build quality of the G2 Tamrons has completely surprised me.
p.1 #20 · EF 70-200L 2.8 IS (mk1) vs Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 query
Pixelpuffin wrote:
I have the 100L macro, but I’m now chomping at the bit whether to grab the Tamron version instead. The build quality of the G2 Tamrons has completely surprised me.
The EF 100L is a bit special given its more sophisticated stabilization, and realistically the only lenses that are 'better' overall are only available in other mounts - such as Canon's own RF 100L. That's not to cast any shade on Tamron here, just that you wouldn't be gaining anything substantial, if anything at all, and you'd be losing Canon's IS as well as their tuning on the AF motor. Build quality is roughly equal.
Optically speaking, the 100L could be sharper wide open, but it's the longitudinal chromatic aberration that is troublesome. That's also a challenge for every other lens of the same vintage.
