Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC G2

remember you still have to pay local taxes buying through canon. So for me that would be an extra $103 ontop. I think between the 2 it would be close in performance wise.

I hadn't accounted for sales tax. Then there's B&H 4% rewards. Back to a difference of over $250.00 for me.

yea..I got the 4% as well. so thats a free $50 gift card to use there

Obligatory cat photo

I got one of those as well. My wifes cat
shot at ISO 1600 handheld at 1/25 200mm

nice sharp kitty photos!!

BrickR wrote in post #18297845
Actually I had the previous version and one of the first things I noticed was that it didn't feel like it went to 200. After some testing found it didn't, so I'm not parroting anything, speaking from actual experience (which is why I said "in real world use"). Although I liked the lens, I wanted an actual 200mm from it, I guess I'm just a weirdo like that, speaking about stuff I have had actual experience with LOL.

here's the deal with the focus breathing, from shorter distances, like maybe 10 feet, the 70-200ii had larger magnification, felt like a true 200, where tamron felt 160 ish at that distance. You can probably solve that by stepping half a step closer, and perspective distortion is pretty darn minimal with half a step. at further distances like 30 feet, it's basically the same at that point.

at very very close distances, near MFD, the tamron would act like a 135-150, where canon is still at 200....... HOWEVER, the tamron has a much closer minimum focus distance compared to other 70-200's and therefore can probably do a better job of filling the frame!

so in the end, the differences are fairly a wash. If you see matt granger's review on the topic, the tamron can fill the frame even more than the nikon 200 f2 prime! so while it does breath, just getting a little closer can do the trick and then some.

wisv1k wrote in post #18300515
So with 15% off refurbished, the Canon version is $1427. I was planning to give the Tamron a little more time on the market then likely buy one but now I'm torn.

I'de jump on that, you can keep it for many years, and sell with little loss. The price of the canon is very stable, not subject to big swings, which the tamron is bound to do.

the canon is also at MFD closer to 230mm so making the it seem like the tamron is even shorter then 200 but its not as short because the canon is going 30mm over 200

It ended up being a difference of over $250.00 in the end after taxes and whatnot. Not the steal I originally thought.

honestly I think you would be happy with either lens.
So far with my tamron I havnt been out using it but I use it around the house constantly just getting to know it. Its AF is very accurate and consistant. I dont think it ever misses photos so thats something I dont worry about like on some other 3rd party with AF is inconsistant. it seems to not hunt at all. I have had it hunt like twice in my house in low light but target had almost zero contrast. today when i get home going to see if one of my kids whats to be my test and have them run at me full speed and see how well it does on a full burst

her was a quick tracking shots of my daughter running at me
https://flic.kr/s/aHsk​SDaZwu

Finally got to get outside with this lens.

What are the opinions of the G2 with the new teleconverters? Once the tax return comes through I'm pulling the trigger and am considering a teleconverter too? 1.4 vs 2x?

tamron released new ones designed to work with this lens. So if anything probably give the best results from them. I never owned or used any TC with my lenses. Not a big fan of them