Any experience with the Tamron 70-200mm VC & the 70-200L IS I?

Either a used Canon 70-200L IS I, or a new Tamron 70-200 VC....??? They're both about the same price, with Canon coming in maybe a couple hundred bucks cheaper (depending on the deal). I'm leaning towards the Tamron right now, but there's something about the red ring that keeps drawing me in. The 70-200L 2.8 II is out of the question...it's just too darn expensive and I don't make a living from photography to justify it.

Am I over thinking this and falling victim to the "Red Ring effect"? That's what I'm calling it when my brain starts to think that L glass is the only way to go when I'm considering 2 similar lenses....even if the L is older and used. I've looked through the threads, and I'm really blown away by both lenses. Maybe more so by the Tamron....but that darn red ring! It's intoxicating! I feel like a moth drawn to the flame.

Convince me that the Tamron is the better choice. .....Or is it?

Pick tamron

Talley wrote in post #16711875
Pick tamron

I agree, and the bad guys won't pick you and your whitey!

Heya,

The 70-200 F4L IS is a very good zoom, and very sharp, and it has weather sealing. That's important, since not all L-glass is weather sealed. Surprisingly. Some are not. The 70-200 F4L non-IS for example is not (grr). This is a phenomenal lens though. Light weight, fast autofocus, very sharp. One of the best zooms for the buck you can get.

The 70-200 F2.8 VC however is a great lens. It does rival the new MKII version by Canon, but doesn't best it. It's very fast, the F2.8 is a huge selling point, it has VC, another huge selling point. It's heavier though.

If you need F2.8, there's no contest.

If you are good to go with F4, then really, the Canon is the way to go in my opinion simply due to weight if you plan on walking around with it all day.

Don't get caught up with red-rings. Not all L-lenses are super great. And they're not even all weather sealed (that's my main concern).

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #16711960
The 70-200 F2.8 VC however is a great lens. It does rival the new MKII version by Canon, but doesn't best it. It's very fast, the F2.8 is a huge selling point, it has VC, another huge selling point. It's heavier though.

For a thousand dollars less I can't help but declare it the best value.

I have not used the Tamron but here is a comparison. Their example it is better at 70mm than the MKI, loos about the same at 100mm, and the MKI seems better at 135mm and 200mm.

So if like many say the Tamron VC rivals the Canon MKII, then I would think like many of the current 70-200mm f/2.8 there are copy variations.

All IS Canon 70-200mm Ls are weather sealed if that makes a difference to you, like it does to MalVeauX.

I think either lens would be an excellent choice. The Tamron you can get warranty with, nut not with the MKI.

I want and sometimes need 2.8, so the 70-200 f4L is out. Tamron's warranty is a nice bonus too thinking about it. I keep leaning towards the Tammy. I just need to fully fall onto that side.

rivas8409 wrote in post #16712534
I keep leaning towards the Tammy. I just need to fully fall onto that side.

Ah! Yes, that $1000 savings, and the reviews are Sooo close, and the IQ is so good, and the images on the Internet look so good, and it is weather resistant, but not sealed, and it has a great warranty, and did I mention that $1000 savings. Now if it just had that "Canon" name.

The decisions third party lenses bring, are they really as good as the manufacturer's? What to do. I am in the same boat, the Tammy REALLY looks good but will I still want that name? Logic says no, emotion says yes - what a pain!!!

I liked the Tamron so much in the Canon version that I picked it up in the Nikon version when I made my switch. No disappointment, superb lens, lighting AF, excellent VC.

Save the grand and get the Tamron.

Lumens wrote in post #16712939
Ah! Yes, that $1000 savings, and the reviews are Sooo close, and the IQ is so good, and the images on the Internet look so good, and it is weather resistant, but not sealed, and it has a great warranty, and did I mention that $1000 savings. Now if it just had that "Canon" name.

The decisions third party lenses bring, are they really as good as the manufacturer's? What to do. I am in the same boat, the Tammy REALLY looks good but will I still want that name? Logic says no, emotion says yes - what a pain!!!

Couldn't have said it better. I've had great results from my Tammy 28-75 so I know first hand they can deliver in IQ. But oh that Canon name and the red ring!!

rivas8409 wrote in post #16713493
Couldn't have said it better. I've had great results from my Tammy 28-75 so I know first hand they can deliver in IQ. But oh that Canon name and the red ring!!

I love the Tamron 70-200 but the red ring can be nice!

Anyone that owns the Tamron hear a weird noise when VC is on? It almost sounds like what you hear if you put your ear up to a big shell to "hear the ocean". I just got this lens today and wasn't sure if that was normal, because I didn't notice that noise in the store, but it may have been because there was too much other noise around me.

I really need to give the tamron some serious consideration. Its half the price of the canon ii. I could easily get the tamron and the 100L is macro for the same price.

Rivas.
For me, I prefer new. I also like Image Stabilization.
So that eliminates the used Canon 70-200 f 2.8 L IS Version 1.
That leaves us with three options.
1. Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS.
Wonderful lens, sharp and much lighter in weight. However you stated you need f/2.8 The f/4 L IS is Out!

2. Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Mark II. Simply the best of the bunch. However it comes at a cost. So this is OUT!

3. Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC.
Has IS/ Vibration Control...Check. Has f/2.8....Check. Has a an affordable price...Check.

what are you taking pictures off? actually, it does not matter, go with the Canon. Reason is AF speed and consistency. I used to own the 70-200 2.8 1, and now II, and I was perfectly happy with sharpness of the lens wide open, for shooting people (portrait work). Sharpness beyond what that lens provides wide open is useful for only macro use or landscape, both of which will be shot stopped down. Rest is academic. the Tamron is comparatively a dog when it comes to focus speed, and the focus accuracy on the canon is great. In practice, any marginal benefits in sharpness which the tamron will have will be more than negated by AF differences, unless you are shooting dollar bills, on tripod, with live view focusing