EDIT: Please provide good unbiased feedback. If you are going to start bashing then please refrain from posting. This is an unbiased review by me who owns the Tamron and I clearly define the differences without judgement on either lens. Lets face the FACTs. For many the Tamron provides a GOOD alternative to the best of the best at a substantial lower price.
This review is targeted not for those who have the best or can afford the best. It's for the average person, a hobbyist, that factors cost into their purchases. This is to aid anyone looking to purchase either of these lenses to help them make their own decision.
In this last review of the Tamron I take a different approach. I only had the MK2 lens for one week. During this week I was working 60hours at work and in the middle of installing a new floor in my foyer. Talk about busy ha. I didn't have the time to fully dial in the lenses to make sure the focus matched so instead what I did is I took 4 samples of each scene with each lens. In this order 1. regular focus center point, 2. Live view manual focus 10x, 3. live view contrast, 4. back to regular focus. I took the best matching of the two lenses and this is what you see. I did a straight import into LR4.3 and exported using the lightroom defaults. I will now give you my verdict then list what I feel is a unbiased comparison between the two lenses. Finally I will post up 26 different scenes where I comment on each one and comment on areas to look at. You can also click on the image to see the full size image (~9-13MBea) so you can download them and process them for your review. I don't feel like posting the raws. Too much data. On to my comparison:
The winner: Canon 70-200 2.8 MK2
Tamron: Not far behind and the better performer for the dollar
MY COMPARISON
At 100% in every single photo I can clearly pick out the Canon. It lives up to it's legendary expectations of being the "Holy Grail" of zooms. In every single sample the colors are more accurate, deeper and the sharpness edges out the Tamron time and time again. However, the Bokeh in busy backgrounds the winner is the Tamron producing smoother creamier blurs. Also the CA is better controlled on the Tamron than the Canon. Back to colors I mentioned the colors on the Canon was truer and deeper meaning to me it has better microcontrast, however, the Tamron has a warmer color in all the photos. This could be a good thing for portraits. The sunset colors are better on the Tamron. Flare on both lenses are very well controlled and was hard for me to produce. The Tamron has more vignetting at all focal lenghts which again would be great for portraits. Focus breathing is a big topic on these lenses. At MFD the canon images are larger... much larger. At about 125' away the difference is only slight and at infinity the Tamron is actually slightly larger, go figure. Autofocus on both are very accurate and the speed from infinity to mfd is very close to eachother. Focusing on subjects that were 15' away to subjects that were 100' away was instant on both. The difference is the sound. The canon is completely silent while the Tamron although quiet you can faintly hear it. Because of this it gives you the feeling it's slower because you can hear it but side by side tests to me the Tamron is very close to the Canon. As far as SERVO tracking... I can only comment that when the Tarmon was mounted on a 5D3 it was dead on accurate. On my 6D using center point and my kids riding scooters zipping past me and toward me I had the same amount of failures with the Canon as I did with the Tamron. This tells me when it's time to track I need to add a 7D or move to the 5D3.
MY CONCLUSION
If your income solely relys on your images, get the Canon. If you have an abudance of money and desire the best, get the Canon. If you even have to think about money, get the Tamron. If you do portraits then definitely get the Tamron. If you want the amazing 6 year warranty, get the Tamron. At the end of the day I ask myself this. Is it worth the extra $1,000? I answer that by asking myself another question... Would I rather have the Canon mk2 or would rather have the Tamron and the Sigma 35? (or insert another lens here)... Look at these samples and you be your own judge.
Disclaimer: There are small differences in these samples, however, this is a slap in your face put up or shut up back and forth lens swap comparison samples. They are all handheld with IS on. I don't need to hear about complaining that these are unfair w/o tripod etc. This is real world testing. I have alot of samples here for you to draw your own conclusions.
ADJUSTING TAMRON TO MEET CANON
I will say this... in MOST cases if you are using Lightroom sliders. A bump in contrast to +10, blacks set to -15, sharpness set to +37 (stock is +25) you will produce an image that is VERY close to the Canon. This should give you an idea of the difference in the post processing differences. In most cases this matches the Canon. In some it still doesn't match and in others it exceeds the Canon.
MY FAVORITE SCENES
6, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25
ALL SHOTS ARE AT 2.8 - I HAVE POSTED WHAT MM FOR EACH SCENE AND/OR FOR EACH LENS
SCENE 1 - 200mm 2.8
I shot this from inside my living room through a dirty window. The wind was blowing slightly so some leafs can be directly compared while some can't because of them moving in and out of focus.
CANON
TAMRON
SCENE 2 - 200mm 2.8
I do believe the Tamron nailed focus on the flag. Look at the threading on the right side near the hook. The Canon focus was a tad front which shows well in the tree being much sharper. Looking at the leafs on the right the Tamron is better but again I think the difference here was focus not matching up precisely.
CANON
TAMRON
SCENE 3 - 70mm 2.8
Focus on these are pretty darn close. What sticks out to me is the fact the Canon has more CA on the hook.
CANON
TAMRON
SCENE 4 - 70mm 2.8
Had some change in lighting on this one but pay attention to the threading on the straps and the bolt head on the ratchet
CANON
TAMRON
