# Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 17, 2017)

```
<p>A Canon Rumors reader has put together a nice and quick comparison between the recently announced Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 and the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.</p>
<p>You can see a physical comparison of <a href="http://frankster.digital/better-canon-holy-trinity-%EF%BC%9Ftamron-sp-70-200mm-f2-8-di-vc-usd-g2-short-review/">both lenses here</a>.</p>
<p>You can see a quick sharpness comparison <a href="http://frankster.digital/tamron-sp-70-200mm-f2-8-di-vc-usd-g2-%E6%88%90%E5%83%8F%E6%B8%AC%E8%A9%A6/">between the two lenses here</a>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fpK4jeVa-aY" width="728" height="409" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><em>thanks Frank</em></p>
<p><strong>Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 $1299: <a href="https://bhpho.to/2kkLnJ2">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="https://www.adorama.com/tm702002nk.html?kbid=64393">Adorama</a> | <a href="https://mpex.com/tamron-sp-70-200mm-f-2-8-di-vc-usd-g2-lens-canon.html?acc=3">MPEX</a></strong></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## bereninga (Feb 17, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Canon's looked slightly faster to focus, but the Tamron is no slouch.


----------



## foto fuhrer (Feb 17, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

If you already own the Canon 2.8 Mk ii, would there be any point in buying the Tamron?


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 17, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



foto fuhrer said:


> If you already own the Canon 2.8 Mk ii, would there be any point in buying the Tamron?



Not unless you want both lenses.


----------



## slclick (Feb 17, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

If you are in the market for a 70-200, things just got more interesting.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Hard to compare sharpness in this type of comparison where focus for one or the other lens could be off; but on the test shots the Tammy was sharper in the corners. Have to wait for Dustin to take a look.


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

If my Canon were that soft, I'd send it in for service. I'm not seeing this as a valid comparison, as mine is razor sharp at that distance without sharpening.

I am very glad to see Tamron giving Canon a run for their money! But not a good copy of the Canon, or something was off in the procedure.


----------



## Alex_M (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

I totally agree with you, the difference is quite massive. Something is not right with either test parameters or with the lens. I would like to see The Digital Picture set of standard target shots in order to do the judgement. Let's see what transpires. 



YuengLinger said:


> If my Canon were that soft, I'd send it in for service. I'm not seeing this as a valid comparison, as mine is razor sharp at that distance without sharpening.
> 
> I am very glad to see Tamron giving Canon a run for their money! But not a good copy of the Canon, or something was off in the procedure.


----------



## slclick (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



Alex_M said:


> I totally agree with you, the difference is quite massive. Something is not right with either test parameters or with the lens. I would like to see The Digital Picture set of standard target shots in order to do the judgement. Let's see what transpires.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



+1 yep, I'll wait for Bryan and Dustin to give it their reviews and then see if Roger can add any insight.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



Alex_M said:


> I totally agree with you, the difference is quite massive. Something is not right with either test parameters or with the lens. I would like to see The Digital Picture set of standard target shots in order to do the judgement. Let's see what transpires.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



disclaimer : i still prefer lab test for reference , we are not professional lab test guy / lens owner so we perform short test and return the lens within the time slot (count in hours actually , gonna rush) 

actually the canon wasnt that bad on my 5D mk3 , because of the limited time and location we can only do some test in rush , we can borrow the lens again next week so we can do the 200mm test which we crash up the file in accident +__+ 

not sure bad copy or the my canon optics need some calibration , do AF / MF / liveview focus but wont help to improve the the shaprness

i wont be surprise if tamron win in the shaprness test because it was designed under new standard and the cannon are old standard (i mean design resolution requirement / lpmm / MTF ) 





photo hosting source hotographylife


from the boring MTF chart you can see the advantages (although 30 lp mm was outdated and meaning less but you still see it kept as a good position )





photo hosting source :digitalphotostop

and this one canon (yea boring MTF still told something , at least resolution and possible some characteristic of the lens )

compare two MTF , i wont surprise tamron win if you gonna pixel peeping +__+ 
if using both lens on canon 5D MK3 the different will be much less because the cmos wont contain that much pixel. just like sigma 35 1.4 art vs canon 35 1.4 vs canon 35 1.4 II , sorry but for some "silly" spec like resolution test , the new lens usually win.


for color , out of focus quality , i dont have big comment on the canon versus tamron , both dont have strange onion ring or swirly bokeh ball , they render stuff in quite similar way too 

one more thing , shaprness wasn't that important to most photo and blurry corner may produce a effect that "looks contrast" due to the framing , usually we placing out of focus area on corner especially portrait work , ok now who need to care about the corner sharpness +__+ (for landscape guy or photo merge people , border sharpness improvements will help , do it ) 
capture something good is more important than made a pixel peeping sharp photo .

not all people need to buy this lens but if you got a hunger pixel monster camera and you want to do more cropping or over sampling work , you can consider buy this lens as it can feed the monster cmos 

if you were a photographer who don't do a lots of pixel peeping / did not own monster camera / already own 70 200 / i would suggest you spend money on other stuff like light modifier or use it for a trip 

frank 

my english seems crappy ROFL , if you found anything strange , or have anything want to say with us , welcome to leave a message there or email me


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

here is another hands on with the new Tamron lens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oAYYamOehk&t=0s


----------



## ranplett (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Are you guys sure this isn't the Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS first gen? Because that's what the IQ reminds me of.


----------



## Berowne (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

So what? I dont care, will never buy a Tamron-Lens.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

We buy Canon for more reasons than AF speed and MFT charts. The L lenses are generally built better and are more durable than anything else on the market. A well used (but well cared for) ef 70-200 f2.8 LIS II will still look almost new after 5 years of professional use than any Tamron on 3rd party lens. The Canon will cost more, but retain a lot more of the value on resale. If the economy drops...it might even be worth more S/H...this has happened to me several times...but 3rd partly lenses aren't worth anything S/H and there's good reason for that. Also, Canon tend to make amazing all in one packages, their attention to design is excellent. I don't know any other lens that does so much...so well. Other lenses can come close or even eclipse it in one or two areas, but not in the over all package. 
The last point is what if it breaks or goes wrong. In Canon land it's is very rare, but the professional support (here in the UK) is amazing and you don't get that with Tamron. I can have my lens turned around in less than 3 days with the option of a like for like loaner. Good luck with Tamron.


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Frank, you read English well enough, so your statement, "i wont be surprise if tamron win in the shaprness test because it was designed under new standard and the cannon are old standard," seems "designed" to either flame or mislead.

Yes, the images from the Tamron you've presented are impressively sharp; however, you show images supposedly from a Canon lens that are softly focused and have some weird CA going on. Most of us responding to you agree that these images are completely uncharacteristic of the ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, which you can easily comprehend, yet you keeping banging on about it being an out of date lens?

Claims such as yours, with clumsy hiding behind language difficulties, raise questions about your motivations. I hope Canon Rumors knows who you are; if they haven't vetted you, I'm disappointed they gave you a soap box.

Speculation: the Canon lens could simply have a dirty UV filter on it, thus skewing results while identifying the lens in EXIF.


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Matt Granger has posted some raw photo samples from a Nikon sample Taken on a D5 if anyone is interested. Also shows with the 2x teleconverter. http://mattgranger.com/tamron70200

To be honest I am not sure these photos really impress me or not. I am looking for a touch more resolution and detail.


----------



## infared (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

I own the Canon Lens. I use it on a 5DIII. I have no plans on buying the Tamron. ...but if this test holds true the Tamron is sharper wide-open on the edges at 70mm and 135mm (did he test it at 200mm?)
I find it amusing that so many of the regulars here are so much in denial. Hey the Tamron looks sharper...."brand loyalty" doesn't change that. 
I hope these results are valid...it's very entertaining! 8)


----------



## Rudeofus (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



YuengLinger said:


> Speculation: the Canon lens could simply have a dirty UV filter on it, thus skewing results while identifying the lens in EXIF.


A randomly dirty UV lens would affect all apertures more or less the same, but in Frank's tests the Canon clears up nicely as it is stepped down. Whatever went wrong, it's unlikely to come from an front filter.

One thing which does surprise me with his test, is that the Tamron wide open @ 70mm @imagecenter looks like it has quite a bit of lens flare, and it doesn't seem to have this at any other focal length, image location or aperture. There's a good chance that the rushed test created some inconsistencies.

PS: a 70-200 is a kids/sports lens, not the typical landscape lens, I'd be much more concerned with price, flare resistance and AF speed than with corner sharpness.


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



infared said:


> I own the Canon Lens. I use it on a 5DIII. I have no plans on buying the Tamron. ...but if this test holds true the Tamron is sharper wide-open on the edges at 70mm and 135mm (did he test it at 200mm?)
> I find it amusing that so many of the regulars here are so much in denial. Hey the Tamron looks sharper...."brand loyalty" doesn't change that.
> I hope these results are valid...it's very entertaining! 8)



You've missed the point. Nobody is taking anything away from the Tamron images here. Those of us with good copies (with clean front elements : ) of the Canon know that Frank's images are not representative, and in fact approach deception, perhaps to make the Tamron shine a bit brighter. Or he just has a copy with a hazy front element.

Like I said, it's great Canon has competition! But there is no value in using a degraded image from brand A to make an optimized image from brand B appear "better."

Before "calling out" "fan boys" or "apologists," best read carefully, and follow that up with even a cursory review of our history of posts. I skewer all brands.


----------



## sanj (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



YuengLinger said:


> Frank, you read English well enough, so your statement, "i wont be surprise if tamron win in the shaprness test because it was designed under new standard and the cannon are old standard," seems "designed" to either flame or mislead.
> 
> Yes, the images from the Tamron you've presented are impressively sharp; however, you show images supposedly from a Canon lens that are softly focused and have some weird CA going on. Most of us responding to you agree that these images are completely uncharacteristic of the ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, which you can easily comprehend, yet you keeping banging on about it being an out of date lens?
> 
> ...



You know something I don't? Pls fill me in, this is interesting.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



GMCPhotographics said:


> We buy Canon for more reasons than AF speed and MFT charts. The L lenses are generally built better and are more durable than anything else on the market. A well used (but well cared for) ef 70-200 f2.8 LIS II will still look almost new after 5 years of professional use than any Tamron on 3rd party lens. The Canon will cost more, but retain a lot more of the value on resale. If the economy drops...it might even be worth more S/H...this has happened to me several times...but 3rd partly lenses aren't worth anything S/H and there's good reason for that. Also, Canon tend to make amazing all in one packages, their attention to design is excellent. I don't know any other lens that does so much...so well. Other lenses can come close or even eclipse it in one or two areas, but not in the over all package.
> The last point is what if it breaks or goes wrong. In Canon land it's is very rare, but the professional support (here in the UK) is amazing and you don't get that with Tamron. I can have my lens turned around in less than 3 days with the option of a like for like loaner. Good luck with Tamron.



Actually yes LOL , i dont have hungry camera like 5DSR , my IS II did perform well on my A7R and 5D3 , the shaprness wasnt that big difference if testing on a "common camera" which near 24MP 

for 100% pixel peeping on a 50MP copy , that was a huge enlarge and u know that was very small on the cmos also the small part of 135 format image circle , thats why some canon L prime also "seems soft" when put on a 5DSR and take a 100% view on it. i will keep my canon IS II because that was my working lens and it more than enough for the job tho


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



YuengLinger said:


> Frank, you read English well enough, so your statement, "i wont be surprise if tamron win in the shaprness test because it was designed under new standard and the cannon are old standard," seems "designed" to either flame or mislead.
> 
> Yes, the images from the Tamron you've presented are impressively sharp; however, you show images supposedly from a Canon lens that are softly focused and have some weird CA going on. Most of us responding to you agree that these images are completely uncharacteristic of the ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, which you can easily comprehend, yet you keeping banging on about it being an out of date lens?
> 
> ...



mislead ? nah , nowdays many company told you their lens are ready / design for supporting high resolution camera 

actually at those years , lens wasn't designed for feeding monster camera which hunger for resolution , i did put my 70 200 IS II / 24 105 / 17 40 on my old 1D CCD / 1D MK II N and both at 100% i dont see any problem
on 5D MKIII or A7R it sell perform alright , the problem is when you enlarge from a big 50MP softcopy , some weakness will spotted .

while new generation lens they have some design requirement like "image weight" , like what sony saying on their GM series lens , you may ask am i using a problem lens . i can firmly told you that was my working lens and it kept in good condition , no issue or fogged element inside . the filter cap on was a B+W 010 UV wasnt the great but it wasnt the main issue of 100% view image are soft .

you may disappointed about the canon image test show " completely uncharacteristic" of a IS II but i am sure that i was similar to what canon test on their lens , you can try put some CANON L on the 5DSR and check it out , it does show the softness of the lens . if you still have problem asking me the resolution test was cheating , go read the official MTF chart , it wont lie to you 

at 30Lp/mm which way lower than 5DSR requirement , then go check out tamron MTF chart 

actually it was tired to explain for someone doesn't read stuff correctly 

take a look on those lab test, if you want a good sharpness , put on some good lens 
the OTUS is sharp even wide open , no need to argue about that right ?
lens did show weakness when put on a camera over it's maximum ability , just like those years people upgraded to D800E and found their 24 70 2.8 are damn soft , same problem happen when people upgrade to 5DSR


asking a 2010 introduced lens , wide open do razor sharp from border to border under 50MP 100% view ? 
sorry i don't think there are lens like that exist 


"completely uncharacteristic" wut ? 


the high pixel density show the difference , if you resize the 50MP file to a smaller one , you may not able to spot the issue .

disclaimer : i dont recieve any penny from tamron or canon or any brand , and i dont have to running for advertisement yet , when i show the weakness of a canon , people judge me do cheating on the test lol 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=787&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

another ISO 12233 chart test for the CANON 70 200 IS II 
oh soft border ~ it must be cheating according to your "formula" ? (brand A winning brand B = cheating test) 

=====================================================================

"If my Canon were that soft, I'd send it in for service. I'm not seeing this as a valid comparison, as mine is razor sharp at that distance without sharpening."

not sure yours are super copy or not but mine are similar to those test from DXO/TDP 
not razer sharp on 5DSR , especially in border 

will take another try next week , see if i could putting lens on different camera and see if the CANON could get "sharp" like what you say . my lens did perform like what it was on my 5D MK III and A7R 

or can you show me some example ? wide open 100% view , razor sharp from border to border , 70 200 IS II with 5DSR , and i will take it to canon service center , ask them to calibrate my lens until it able to do that .

so i can made a "real" canon compare test image 

every time doing testing , people always say your setup is wrong , the camera was not calibrated , the lens was not calibrated , the timing are not perfect , (tons of reason include your lens are bad copy , bad copy does exist ) (PS. i gonna say it again , it was not a lab test but i will try to made it more "reliable")


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



infared said:


> I own the Canon Lens. I use it on a 5DIII. I have no plans on buying the Tamron. ...but if this test holds true the Tamron is sharper wide-open on the edges at 70mm and 135mm (did he test it at 200mm?)
> I find it amusing that so many of the regulars here are so much in denial. Hey the Tamron looks sharper...."brand loyalty" doesn't change that.
> I hope these results are valid...it's very entertaining! 8)



i own the canon too as a working lens 
on 5D mark III the difference are small 
sharpness may a little better on tamron in the tested copy 
tamron focus and VC did perform well but for whole setup , i still not suggest you to do a lens switch , while canon still got in camera correction which may useful if you use JPG sometimes 

still image stabilization : tamron > canon 
panning shot stabilization : not test yet but according the history and tamton VC was 3way design , i vote for canon 
focus speed : on pair 
sharpness : tamron >canon 
control : canon > tamron (the tamron front zoom ring are not good for me =[ and a little to stiff imo) 

for a good lens to take photo , the resolution wasn't everything .... 

if you are pixel peeping guy or own a hungry camera lik 5DSR , or do photo merge landscape , the extra sharpness from tamron may needed. to be honest , to have best support and compatible use case , do stick with canon . CANON may lanuch the new 70 200 which should able to feed the hungry camera , so you can consider a upgrade if you needed


----------



## IglooEater (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

the 70mm full photo covers a little more than 7 stories, commercial/heavy residential stories are normally about 12 feet apart, which puts the angle of view vertically at over 84 feet, and the camera over 230 feet away from the subject. At that distance, it might be worth considering air and temperature variations, especially in town.


ranplett said:


> Are you guys sure this isn't the Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS first gen? Because that's what the IQ reminds me of.



Oh, and I'll be willingly corrected, if someone know the real distance at which this was taken thanks!


----------



## infared (Feb 18, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



YuengLinger said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > I own the Canon Lens. I use it on a 5DIII. I have no plans on buying the Tamron. ...but if this test holds true the Tamron is sharper wide-open on the edges at 70mm and 135mm (did he test it at 200mm?)
> ...



Thanks for entertaining me further.


----------



## James Larsen (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

The Canon 70-200mm II is a legend.
That being said, the Tamron does look like pretty good competition, and being 15, money is tight, so that price point is pretty good and I'm very interested in buying it.


----------



## Alex_M (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Infra...
just couple of thing that I am still unsure about looking at the test samples:

1. CA levels are pretty high (as per samples) for the Canon lens. I have never seen that much CA on Canon 70-200 II, there is a chance that Lens is a bit out of tune.
2. How well was the camera stabilised? 
3. was the IS engaged or disengaged for each lens?
4. how many shots were taken with each lens and how the sharpest sample was selected?
5. was the same body used?

I am genuinlely interested to get to the bottom of the issue as I am on the market for good 70-200 2.8 lens and will be likely considering Tamron 70-200 2.8 G2 as a candidate amongst others...


infared said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > infared said:
> ...


----------



## TeT (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Well that was an interesting read.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



Alex_M said:


> Infra...
> just couple of thing that I am still unsure about looking at the test samples:
> 
> 1. CA levels are pretty high (as per samples) for the Canon lens. I have never seen that much CA on Canon 70-200 II, there is a chance that Lens is a bit out of tune.
> ...






1. yep pretty high but i dont see that much on A7R / 5DMKIII so i may borrow the lens and 5DSR again and see if the problem could fix 
2. tripod
3. forgotten but both auto detect tripod as what factory said 
4. a few test shot shooting random stuff and then rush on tripod , only 1 or 2 shot , non lab test cannot promise :sharpest sample or firm focus under sunlight on that mini back monitor tho
5. yep , same 5DSR 

why i do call it wasn't a lab test because the lens and body are not calibrated for each other (calibrated with 5DMKIII last time i go for service) , if i take the camera set to service center and ask for calibration the result may better .
most end user dont do calibration 
but many professional does , that's why they know how to use stuff properly 

here come with some random shot i've doing with my 5DMKIII with the IS II lens at the same day when i queue up and waiting for the turn to test the tamron 

air pollution and some hot air blend the image , but for some closer shot , the image looks razor sharp like what users said , if you dont enlarge that big 



IglooEater said:


> the 70mm full photo covers a little more than 7 stories, commercial/heavy residential stories are normally about 12 feet apart, which puts the angle of view vertically at over 84 feet, and the camera over 230 feet away from the subject. At that distance, it might be worth considering air and temperature variations, especially in town.
> 
> 
> ranplett said:
> ...




^ you get the point +__+
especially when shooting far distance so we pick a near by building for the quick test but at some possible heat source still found weird softness on it 

not sure if my lens are really bad copy or what , but it looks similar to what those LAB test does 
i was unable to made the lens do sharper , the "accurate" live-view focus doesn't help , already reach the correct focus and the image still not razor sharp 

the 10 dollars was a little plastic made money and printed with high dpi + enough detail so we using as a mini ISO12233 style stuff which also fit in your pocket +__+ but test with 10 dollars only work in hongkong because most people can find it and compare it on hands , how the lens rendering the money it self 

but for oversea readers it wont work because you wont have that 10 dollars on hands for compare , not that effective to use as reference 

#gonna find that out if my canon lens was actually bad or not


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



the 10 dollars wasnt perfectly straight 

not lab test , just for reference

5D MKIII , hongkong 10 dollars plastic version

because the camera body jpg are larger than 5000KB so i do upload pre-corping with a screen capture of whole photo


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> ........
> 
> #gonna find that out if my canon lens was actually bad or not



I have enjoyed your read Frank and you have made many valid points. That said. Your photo you posted is not that great at all in terms of resolution. Thats the image quality I would expect from the 80D with the 18-135mm Nano for example. Its not bad, but no where near what you should be getting on the 5DSR or 5D3 with the 70-200L IS II. Matter of fact its about 3 or 4 times worse..

That said also. When you talk about comparing hungry image sensors not being able to provide on a pixel level you have to consider this. Take the 5D3 and print a 24x36 inch print. Then take the 5DSR and print a 24 x 36" print. The 5DSR while softer on a per pixel level will still end up with a sharper print at 24 x 36". Many over look this. Not sure if you did, but just wanted to throw that out there.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> the 10 dollars wasnt perfectly straight
> 
> not lab test , just for reference
> 
> ...



https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7vAC8awli5NZUdPYWNicnZYRkE

here is the shot on A7R + canon 2.8II 
the corner one i was directly focusing on it , so it should be the maximum sharpness 

about 20 shot total and i pick the best sharpness one 

those little triangle show the difference tho 

p.s. lazy test but you can simply count the line on the center but the corner seems cant


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Yea Frank looking at the China bills you photo'd.. They soft man.. Something is a miss with something for sure.. Anyone you know got another 70-200 you can borrow to compare with?


----------



## Alex_M (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Hksfrank,



> 3. forgotten but both auto detect tripod as what factory said



not a good practice. This could pose an issue potentially. I would re-run with IS switched off for sure.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

here the actual size of the triangle and some detail on the 10 dollars 

just for reference that how big it was


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



ExodistPhotography said:


> hksfrank said:
> 
> 
> > ........
> ...



actually i resized by A7R photo to a smaller one did get sharp print too 
the pixel count is real .... we ve got some resized test shot or non 100% zoom test shot and i dont see big problem on there 

just dont pixel peeping like the test (actually no one do pixel peeping like that in real world) 
50MP 100% view on a screen was a really big enlarge from a 135 format lol (36x24mm) 

5DSR 50MP already a well known hungry camera and some lens did not perform well on that especially wide open , do 100% view it even worst because you can see it ... 

because at a hungry camera you can maximize and capture as much as detail from that image circle , if your lens did provide more detail , it can capture more . if your lens only provide nothing ,it capture nothing 

http://aguiarphotography.com.au/photography/canon-5d-s-and-canon-5d-mark-3-do-you-need-50-mega-pixels/

if you dont have good lens to feed the monster camera, dont buy the hungry 5DSR , if you did want pixel peeping or massive corp fun , go 5DSR and get some good lens , those new lens like 11-24 , 35 1.4II perform better on it 
16 35 III was updated too 

some canon prime are coming and i expected it will provide enough resolution to feed the cmos 

p.s. seems the SIGMA art prime did got good resolution too


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

BTW here are two images from me on the same bill. Exported as DNG, no noise reduction, no sharpening. Nothing.. One was taken at ISO100 the other at ISO1600. Both f/7.1, 18-135mm Nano USM at 135mm on the 80D. As you can see. Mine are sharper despite not being cropped in as much.

ISO1600 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9FuURXoo8mGZC0tS29ycEEzNms/view?usp=sharing
ISO100 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9FuURXoo8mGdGhleHFXVGVXeTg/view?usp=sharing

Just for comparison sake here is the ISO100 image exported as a JPEG with proper noise and sharpening applied:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9FuURXoo8mGV2dxRnIxU0JIOWc/view?usp=sharing


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



ExodistPhotography said:


> Yea Frank looking at the China bills you photo'd.. They soft man.. Something is a miss with something for sure.. Anyone you know got another 70-200 you can borrow to compare with?



soft in corner or both?

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7vAC8awli5NVXpJV1BRYjk2ZEk

this one A7R , 55 1.8 , focus to similar position near the triangle array 

crop attached and fullsize at google drive


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



ExodistPhotography said:


> BTW here are two images from me on the same bill. Exported as DNG, no noise reduction, no sharpening. Nothing.. One was taken at ISO100 the other at ISO1600. Both f/7.1, 18-135mm Nano USM at 135mm on the 80D. As you can see. Mine are sharper despite not being cropped in as much.
> 
> ISO1600 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9FuURXoo8mGZC0tS29ycEEzNms/view?usp=sharing
> ISO100 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9FuURXoo8mGdGhleHFXVGVXeTg/view?usp=sharing



https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5NcUctbFB3c2Njazg/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5Nd0FacG9JdEx4Tms/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5Ndm54RDNsRHhlTEU/view?usp=sharing

600D F2.8 and A7R F2.8 / F8
file name


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> ............
> 
> some canon prime are coming and i expected it will provide enough resolution to feed the cmos
> 
> p.s. seems the SIGMA art prime did got good resolution too



Avoid spending to much time at DXO Mark. ;-) While I do not put much stock in their numbers at all. I do like viewing their field view to get an idea of how a lens performs through out the zoom range. 
That said.. If you were to look at what they post about a said lens on a FF with large pixels like a 5D3 and then what they posted about say an 80D with small pixel pitch. You would assume that the 80D has lower resolution despite higher MP density. While this is partially true. If your printed a 24 x 36 inch print with the 80D and the same with the 5D3. The 5D3 would in fact appear sharper. However if you had to crop the 5D3 image down to the same framing of say the 80D would have got for the same image. Then 80Ds image would in fact come out sharper. So while large pixel sensors are in fact less demanding on a lens. Its more to image resolution then per pixel sharpness. Like I mentioned before. The 5DSR on a per pixel level will in fact be more demanding on a lenses optics. It will also looks softer at a per pixel level. When you jam that many pixels into the same size print at 24 x 36 inch. The 5DSR will come out the winner each and every time. At the same time you can print much larger then 24x36 with the 5DSR and up to a point get better resolution then you could with the 5D3.

The 5DSR is a studio, product and landscape camera for those who wish to not go the route of medium format. Or just simply can not afford it and need something as close as they can get.

But were getting off the point that your lens is just wacked.. Not sharp at all..


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> ExodistPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > BTW here are two images from me on the same bill. Exported as DNG, no noise reduction, no sharpening. Nothing.. One was taken at ISO100 the other at ISO1600. Both f/7.1, 18-135mm Nano USM at 135mm on the 80D. As you can see. Mine are sharper despite not being cropped in as much.
> ...



Very interesting. You should be getting a little bit sharper results. The 18-135mm Nano USM is great at focusing but is one of the least sharp lenses I own. Will post another image in a few moments.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



ExodistPhotography said:


> hksfrank said:
> 
> 
> > ExodistPhotography said:
> ...



https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5NOXU2MW9JTl93ZzA/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5Nbmd6bWVzSncxa28/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5NNjdRbWVWSG0xcTA/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5NcGVjaXNkc2w0WG8/view?usp=sharing

actually anything at F8 wont that bad even those cheapo kit or 50 stm fifty 

tested shot at 5DMKIII and as i said the lens was calibrated with my 5D MKIII at service center


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Here ya go. 50mm STM, 80D, RAW DNG No Sharpening
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9FuURXoo8mGVmlRaHZjU0tWWlU/view?usp=sharing


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> .................
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Exactly true....
But your setup should be sharper then mine at a pixel level. I have not bothered to go FF yet simply becuase I never print anything larger then a A3+.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



ExodistPhotography said:


> hksfrank said:
> 
> 
> > ............
> ...



take a look of my new test shot using it on 5DMKIII , it looks as same as come back from service center for calibration 

btw compare a stopped down 135 nano to a wide open F2.8 lens that sounds like "good compare"? even it was a F5.6 wide open which was 2 stop slower than a F2.8 lens , smaller aperture did have better control on image quality , i can achieve good resolution with my 18 55 stm / 50 1.8 stm or even some old lens LOL 

80D with small pixel pitch wasn't a matter in normal situation especially not high ISO 
It will also looks softer at a per pixel level. < yep , thats what i say you can see different while do pixel peeping at small pixel pitch camera , just like some small DC cameras , high demanding on optics . while watching whole photo it still looks good or better than 5DMKIII because the photo are " concentrated " if you put them into a same 27" screen 

cropping a full frame that one wont looks good , that's why people ask equipment for wildlife photography i will suggest them use with "fill the frame" setup rather than buy a fast bulky 1DX but they cant fill up the frame , after 1.6 / 2x corp he got worst result than a APSC 7DII / m43 camera


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Yea I should have posted a f/2.8 shot.. I just crawled out of bed an hour ago.. Still trying to get my brain going.. LOL

50mm STM f/2.8... Would have went f/1.8.. But its just completely falls a part at f/1.8..
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9FuURXoo8mGUE80bGtYZGlYa0E/view?usp=sharing


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



ExodistPhotography said:


> hksfrank said:
> 
> 
> > .................
> ...



600D and the 5DMKIII was a old generation =[ 
actually 36MP was a pick for me when i do wildlife /low-light photography because of it's DR/ISO and it still remain details in shadow area and i also able to push it up . but on 5DMKIII it remain less detail there and give me tons of noise when i pushing it 

for most situation i still using my 5DMKIII / A7II 

for some daily or easy job i will using my LX100 which more than enough to do the job 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7vAC8awli5NQ09OVFZzLWMxOWc
my pocket camera , leaf shutter , 4K and contain lots of stuff inside 
the image file are big enough for writing article tho (not big printing with closer look like poster in BUS STOP / MTR)

actually for big poster on building wall , they dont have high DPI and people wont do peeping , they will view at a certain distance , a crop cmos camera wont be a problem tho. plus for printing there will be tweaking and fine tune


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



ExodistPhotography said:


> Yea I should have posted a f/2.8 shot.. I just crawled out of bed an hour ago.. Still trying to get my brain going.. LOL
> 
> 50mm STM f/2.8... Would have went f/1.8.. But its just completely falls a part at f/1.8..
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9FuURXoo8mGUE80bGtYZGlYa0E/view?usp=sharing



it got a similar design like old 50 1.8 from history , with updated coating and aperture , new motor and case , also the metal mount is back ROFL 

wide open not that good but when it stopped down it still a good lens 
for wide open perform well lens i recommended the 40 2.8 pancake 
which already good wide open (small enough are good too) 


seperate link for other reader dont climbing old post , new easy test of the 70 200 ISII with my 5KMKIII which calbirate from service center +__+ 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5NOXU2MW9JTl93ZzA/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vAC8awli5Nbmd6bWVzSncxa28/view?usp=sharing


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> ..........
> actually for big poster on building wall , they dont have high DPI and people wont do peeping , they will view at a certain distance , a crop cmos camera wont be a problem tho. plus for printing there will be tweaking and fine tune



Exactly..


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> ......
> 
> wide open not that good but when it stopped down it still a good lens
> for wide open perform well lens i recommended the 40 2.8 pancake
> which already good wide open (small enough are good too)



I picked up this copy for a review right after it came out. I had the older micro motor one and hated it. But this one surprised me way more then I thought it would. So much so I made it part of my kit.  I normally use this one for portraits in my small home studio down here in the Philippines. So it works extremely well. I also have the Canon 35mm f/2 IS USM. Which I love also. So it would not make sense to get a 40mm to be honest.  
I actually have a growing number of lenses, many I am trying to sell to make room for upgrades like these two latest from Tamron. My EFS 10-22 is due for an update and Tamron has spoken. Also I was going to by the Canon EF 135. But since I also am in need to update my EF 85mm f/1.8. The 70-200 G2 from Tamron could be a better option. 
Looking at Matt Grangers photos he took on the D5 wide open. They look nice. Sharpness is good. Micro contrast is a touch low, but the bokeh is very pleasing.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



ExodistPhotography said:


> hksfrank said:
> 
> 
> > ......
> ...



the canon 18 135 did very big improvement on each generation 
from 18 135 IS (which was bad, damn bad)
to 18 135 STM ( way better , also better than 15 85 in some test)
and then the newest NANO version , which put lots of optics upgrade ..... 

85 1.8 was a bit old and those purple fringing are so pain for me (i got 85L II on purpose , band show / music show work when damn dark and i dont need more DOF , it still got purple fringing =[) 
tamron are doing new 1024 and i've on hands for 5 minutes last time (YES , 5 MINUTES ONLY) and they also do some simple test that point it to the sun , ghosting and flare control are impressive , it focus fast and silently , the look was similar to a sigma 10-22 , i ve stick to the lens and hear the focus noise , very silent and when VC kick in now it dont have kicking sound . i am amazed by it focus fast but not a ring type motor +__+

next Monday i can have the 10-24 lens for a while (like 30 minutes maybe , no take away) 

FTM are still there on 10-24 and you can manual focus trick under control and i dont like canon 10-18 which was focus over wire .... 

did you also going to buy the 135F2 ? i keep samyang and canon 135 at the same time and use on purpose +__+both are good lens but canon seems gonna update the 135 F2 for updating resolution and those coating 

Beware that i dont sure the tamron handle quality control , at least the 70 200 copy i tested was perform like what their MTF chart show . i suggest can try out at camera store before buying (they do road show in hongkong)


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> ...............
> .....................
> 
> the canon 18 135 did very big improvement on each generation
> ...



Yea the EF 85 1.8 has some serious chroma issue. If you point it at the sky with something like coconut trees in the picture its still noticeable even at f/5.6. But overall its been a good lens. I bought it for about $300 USD over 7 years ago.. Still focuses dead accurate. But I tend to use it at f/4 more often then not.

The new 18-135 Nano is supposed to have the same optical formula. But they could have updated some coatings to improve the optics. That said, focusing speed and accuracy is outstanding. I mainly got this lens just recently to replace my Sigma 17-70mm Contemporary lens that messed up on me. That and for video too. Got the PZ zoom thing being shipped to me now. Should make great travel lens also.

I got my EFS 10-22 about 4 or 5 years back in Hong Kong matter of fact, I got it for $350 USD brand new. It has been a great lens. But its a little soft overall even when stopped down to f/6.3. Plus has coma issues when shooting the night stars. But to its defense its becoming an older lens. I am not all hung up on something being a USM style motor. Just as long as the HLD motor system in the Tamron is dependable and accurate. Looking at the images of the design. It resembles an STM motor. Which should work great for a UWA.

I was considering getting the 135mm F/2. But local Canon store was out of stock since they was remodeling in Cagayan del Oro Phils. So I ended up not getting it yet and was planning to pick it up when I traveled to Kuala Lumpur next month. But since this Tamron has been announced and is priced right for me. I am 9/10 sure I am going to pull the trigger on this one. Authorized dealer I buy from a lot in Davao City said he will have them in stock by the end of this month. He is supposed to msg me soon as he does. I will likely grab my copy first week of April and then the 10-24 later on in the summer. I would get it soon but I also got to buy a new computer by June.. But I will for sure get it before fall becuase I am traveling to South Korea in October to take photos as well. 

If I have any issues with the Tamron I can quickly return it. But yea it will be thrown on to my camera and tested in FoCal and then retested non stop by me in real world photo shoots.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



> Yea the EF 85 1.8 has some serious chroma issue. If you point it at the sky with something like coconut trees in the picture its still noticeable even at f/5.6. But overall its been a good lens. I bought it for about $300 USD over 7 years ago.. Still focuses dead accurate. But I tend to use it at f/4 more often then not.



oh , the canon guy told me they have did some internal adjustment and coating update on the NANO version so the optics perform better than the old STM version tho 

the 85 1.8 focus much faster than my 85L II but i sold it because the rate of using that lens are too low 
i also got a 85 1.4 sigma ex but sold long ago too 

not sure how the tamron 10-24 perform and lets see tomorrow i could test it out (quick test again but this time i dont have APSC UWA to compare with .... the only UWA in my dry storage box was a 17 40 F4 LOL~


----------



## hubie (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Tamron offers 6 years warranty, a fact that is often underestimated.
Send in a faulty Canon for repair and pay 200 or 300 bucks for your IQ on top after one year or pay 0 for Tamron repairs (with certain constraints obviously...) within the first 6 years.


----------



## hksfrank (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hubie said:


> Tamron offers 6 years warranty, a fact that is often underestimated.
> Send in a faulty Canon for repair and pay 200 or 300 bucks for your IQ on top after one year or pay 0 for Tamron repairs (with certain constraints obviously...) within the first 6 years.



yep , the extra long warranty from tamron . buy at specific shop in hongkong you will have 7 years warranty 
i did less problem on canon lens but for tamron , their older model lens like A16 did need to repair sometimes and the coating are easier to have problem than canon (then i bought another copy , because it was cheap enough for a working lens )

but canon did have CPS , which gives you discount and they got lens to rental when the lens takes time to repair ,and a special queue for CPS member too 
although not all people can register as a CPS tho


----------



## pete stone (Feb 19, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Testing only 2 lenses really doesn't show much, due to significant sample variation in zooms.
See:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/02/things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-zoom-lenses/


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Feb 20, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



pete stone said:


> Testing only 2 lenses really doesn't show much, due to significant sample variation in zooms.
> See:
> https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/02/things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-zoom-lenses/



Yep.. He absolutely nailed it.. 

But thanks, despite already know this you now have my paranoia about going with the 70-200 zoom.. LOL.. 
Lot of people wonder why Sigma keeps putting out this short zoom like 24-35 and 18-35 and 50-100.. This is why. Less compromise on image quality then you would with a zoom at a longer focal range.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 20, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



hksfrank said:


> Alex_M said:
> 
> 
> > Infra...
> ...



CIPA / ISO Standard 12233 (TE252) was an update of the CIPA resolution chart with 100MP cameras in mind, this chart replaced the earlier chart that Canon would have used for the EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM MKII. One issue though the new chart DOES NOT have a software program to interpret it correctly scientifically as the chart before did (it was written by Olympus). 
That means all tests are subjective or based on the optical knowledge of engineers that design lenses. 

Ive not tested the example of the EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II I have but I have many other canon lenses on a Canon 5DS some like the EF 16-35mm f4L IS USM are outstanding, others like the Canon Ef 24-70mm f4L IS USM are not so good (around 50mm performance is poor). 
We also use these charts to gauge chromatic abberations (although projection is better for this) 

We have and even field light source using the TE252 chart supplied by Image Engineering in Germany (we can also use the light sphere with another device to check dynamic range and interpret through software). 

Frank test is NOT scientific, tests should be performed in controlled & repeatable conditions before shooting outside wait for more detailed tests before passing judgement (we ignore DXO Mark, remember three test rule. a. test the lens on a bench, b. test the camera on a bench c. test the lens on the camera).


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 20, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

CA levels are ridiculous on the Canon. Before I said dirty UV filter. Hairspray on the UV filter? Just a touch?

Or a tele-extender. That's what it looks like.

I'm convinced the comparison is bogus, and that it does both the Tamron and the OP a disservice. I'll never take any of his future posts seriously unless he comes clean. Just my opinion.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Feb 20, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



YuengLinger said:


> CA levels are ridiculous on the Canon. Before I said dirty UV filter. Hairspray on the UV filter? Just a touch?
> 
> Or a tele-extender. That's what it looks like.
> 
> I'm convinced the comparison is bogus, and that it does both the Tamron and the OP a disservice. I'll never take any of his future posts seriously unless he comes clean. Just my opinion.


Let me add some perspective. The 70-200L II is a high utilization lens with a complicated optical design. One misaligned element could cause issues. I've come a couple of unimpressive copies of the 70-200L II before, i.e. which had me scratching my head cos the Tamron (G1) was producing better IQ. Copy variation exists and it is fallacious to assume that Canon lenses are immune to it.


----------



## slclick (Feb 20, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



StudentOfLight said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > CA levels are ridiculous on the Canon. Before I said dirty UV filter. Hairspray on the UV filter? Just a touch?
> ...



Happened to me.


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 20, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



slclick said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > YuengLinger said:
> ...



True--but the OP seems to be claiming to be a pro photographer, has chosen this pairing to compare, and should therefore have the sense to see that something is wrong with the Canon he is using for the comparison.

Of course if an element gets misaligned there will be issues! Of course Canon has copy variations! Anybody reading CR and lensrental blogs must be well aware of this.

Which is why I cannot take THIS comparison seriously.


----------



## slclick (Feb 20, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



YuengLinger said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > StudentOfLight said:
> ...



+! Oh, me neither, I'm just stating the issue of copy variance


----------



## malarcky (Feb 21, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Is it me, or didn't anyone notice the B&W filter on the Canon and no filter on the Tamron? I looked for a mention of it, but didn't see any admission of the filter. It is clearly (no pun) seen in the height comparison, and that's what got me to realize that the two lenses weren't being compared fairly.

I just bought a brand new copy of the Canon and it was very soft, so I sent it back for an exchange. I'll cross my fingers until the new one gets mounted on my cameras to do a comparison/lens test.

Will someone tell me that I'm not seeing things?


----------



## michi (Feb 21, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



malarcky said:


> Is it me, or didn't anyone notice the B&W filter on the Canon and no filter on the Tamron? I looked for a mention of it, but didn't see any admission of the filter. It is clearly (no pun) seen in the height comparison, and that's what got me to realize that the two lenses weren't being compared fairly.
> 
> I just bought a brand new copy of the Canon and it was very soft, so I sent it back for an exchange. I'll cross my fingers until the new one gets mounted on my cameras to do a comparison/lens test.
> 
> Will someone tell me that I'm not seeing things?



I noticed that also. Just thought I missed some comment about it in the comparison. I would assume it was taken off before the testing? Would be nice to know for sure.


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 21, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Filter-gate.


----------



## e_honda (Feb 25, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*

Tony Northrup says the new Tamron has even more severe focus breathing problems at 200mm than the previous version. Says he won't even bother with a full review on it because of this. Says the MK 1 seemed like it was at about 160mm while the MK II seemed to be at about 135mm.

Around 4:08

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP5-e4Q01Ac&app=desktop


----------



## slclick (Feb 25, 2017)

*Re: Comparison: Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 VC G2 & Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II*



e_honda said:


> Tony Northrup says the new Tamron has even more severe focus breathing problems at 200mm than the previous version. Says he won't even bother with a full review on it because of this. Says the MK 1 seemed like it was at about 160mm while the MK II seemed to be at about 135mm.
> 
> Around 4:08
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP5-e4Q01Ac&app=desktop



I got the memo, it said Tony is the new Ken.


----------

