Canon or Tamron or ????

Hi Everyone,

I'm finally looking to invest in some better glass and really cant decide between the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L (non IS) or the Tamron SP 70-200MM F/2.8 Di VC USD, both are about the same price via DigitalRev.

I will mainly be using the lens for Sledge Hockey so I'm thinking I definitely need the f/2.8 but do I really need IS? Also is it worth spending the extra to get the Canon or will the Tamron be just as good?

Any comments/advice appreciated.

Thanks

Peter

Heya,

The Tamron has VC for the same cost. It's slightly better than the Canon non-IS, at F2.8, at 200mm.

The Canon is the non-IS version. Hopefully it costs less. I wouldn't buy one for more than $750 personally, if even that.

I'd get the Tamron if they're the same cost, or close.

Since you're shooting Hockey, really you're going to have very fast shutter speeds to freeze action (1/500s to 1/1000s easy, right?) and so IS/VC/OS will not play a big role, if any, for what you do, other than view find stabilization perhaps. Fast aperture, high ISO, and fast shutters will be the name of the game for you. So really it doesn't matter. Get the best F2.8 zoom you can.

Very best,

Between those two, IMO it's a no brainer - go with the Tamron. It's an excellent lens bettered only by the Mk2 IS Canon

Thanks guys, I thought that might be the answer but was getting swayed by finally owning an L lens

Will go with the Tamron

PBest78 wrote in post #17647154
Thanks guys, I thought that might be the answer but was getting swayed by finally owning an L lens

Will go with the Tamron

You won't regret it, I've got that lens and it's great.

Before getting the Tamron I had a Canon 70-200 f4L (non IS), which is also a great lens. MOST of what I did with it was sports so I didn't really need IS for that, but there were times when I really could have used it.

PBest78 wrote in post #17647154
but was getting swayed by finally owning an L lens

Some L's are amazing and really define the "L" as a concept.

Some L's are just red rings on a lens.

Don't go after red rings.

(In the case of the 70-200's, red-rings are nice, but the older red-rings can't keep up with newer competition, and Canon's MKII is the definition of what "L" should be these days).

Very best,

it is an older design, superseded twice. not really surprising that much newer lenses, even from 3rd party manufacturers better it

MalVeauX wrote in post #17647174
Some L's are amazing and really define the "L" as a concept.

Some L's are just red rings on a lens.

Don't go after red rings.

(In the case of the 70-200's, red-rings are nice, but the older red-rings can't keep up with newer competition, and Canon's MKII is the definition of what "L" should be these days).

Very best,

Thank you, would love to get the mkII but really cant afford it (or the divorce that would follow lol), I'll stick with the Tamron as suggested

Thanks to everyone who responded

Peter

Haven't seen your exact budget but.... Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM. I love this lens! It has IS also (OS=IS)
http://www.sigmaphoto.​com …70-200mm-f28-ex-dg-os-hsm

After all is said and done about the newer technology, they will have to pry my 70~200 f/2.8 non IS from my cold dead hands. Ha Ha

I did look at the sigma, but a lot of the reviews I've read said the Tamron is better for both autofocus speed and sharpness

PBest78 wrote in post #17648023
I did look at the sigma, but a lot of the reviews I've read said the Tamron is better for both autofocus speed and sharpness

I read that the tamron had slightly faster AF but the sigma had better IQ lol. Overall It went
1- Canon 70-200 2.8 is ii
2- Sigma
3- Tamron
4- Canon 70-200 2.8 is

Id recommend trying them for yourself though. I havent had any issues using mine for birds, events, or portraits.

if money is an issue, go with the tamron, it's extremely good and some ways even better than the canon. I owned both and stuck with the canon for the ability to AF well, even with the 2xiii converter, but eventually sold it. I dont imagine going back to a 70-200F2.8, however, if I did, I'de seriously consider the tamron again.

BlakeC wrote in post #17648036
I read that the tamron had slightly faster AF but the sigma had better IQ lol. Overall It went
1- Canon 70-200 2.8 is ii
2- Sigma
3- Tamron
4- Canon 70-200 2.8 is

Id recommend trying them for yourself though. I havent had any issues using mine for birds, events, or portraits.

naw, the only review that you'll see the sigma have better IQ than the tamron is Roger's optical lab, which is not accurate in practice, since there are plenty of reviews that show the opposite in practice.

Wish I had read this thread earlier as in my city a used Tamron was available for $220 till yesterday.