Talley wrote in post #18090176
I'd agree. The 200 is amazing but it's a special use type lens. Subtle differences to the 70-200 2.8 IS II... and I mean very subtle. The Tamron 70-200 2.8 holds its own very good against the 200/2. I wouldn't ever really recommend the 200/2 to anyone but maybe a nutcase like me.
Well, there must be a lot of nutcases around then
The 200/2 is better than the 70-200/28 IS II for sharpness and colors, even at f/2.8. But people buy it for rendering and character at f/2.
You also get a great 280/2.8 and a very good 400/4 with teleconverters.
I never used the Tamron zoom, but I would be surprised if it was any better than the Canon counterpart.
Then again, is the difference in quality worth the difference in money ? Quite subjective. You decide.