Review on 📷 Optimized for SEO: Tamron SP 70-200MM F/2.8 DI VC USD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon (FX) Cameras by Michael Ringgold

Are you all wondering if this lens is really as good as they say it is? Better. I'm a professional who uses my lenses on a daily basis. I expect and demand a lot from them. I'm not a brand whore and I don't justify the price just because of the label. If I've learned one thing though, it's that sometimes saving can cost $$ money. And if there's ever a product area where that's true, it's lenses. I've spent a lot of time shooting with both the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 Mark II and the Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8 DI VC USM. And after shooting with both, I was extremely surprised at how comparable the two lenses are. You don't need to make an argument for the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 Mark II. This is a beast of a lens that's more than you could ever ask for. I love this age of photography and am amazed every time I get to use products like this. I fell in love with Canon and it was, at least in my opinion, solved. Enter Tamron's SP 70-200 f/2.8 DI VC USM. Tamron has always been an alternative to more expensive, higher quality competitors in the past. But that's usually where it ends. The gap has always been too big to really consider Tamron. Tamron has reinvented itself with the SP 70-200 f/2.8 DI VC USM. I mean, beat him out of the stadium with it. This lens is just amazing. Nothing beats Canon. Serious! It's hard for me to say, but it's true. It works really well and can really handle anything I throw at it with no issues. Do you want to talk about the details, fine. Let's look at the points that influence the choice of Canon or Tamron. First, build quality: Canon wins without a doubt. Canon's build quality is like a tank. A very well made item will serve you for a long time. If Canon has an edge over Tamron, it's this one. That doesn't mean the Tamron isn't well made, because it is. Actually very well built. Not all metal construction like the competition, but not cheap either. Autofocus: Canon has very small fringes, and I mean almost imperceptible. I mean we are wise here. The Tamron focuses quickly and I trust it as much as the Canon. Image stabilization (IS) and vibration compensation (VC): Tamron wins here. Tamron's VC is fantastic. Better than Canon in my opinion. You'll find Canon has two IS modes to choose from. One for vertical movement and one for horizontal movement. Tamron doesn't need two. Its VC system covers everything (every direction) and covers it well. Bokeh: Canon uses 8 aperture blades and Tamron uses 9. Both models produce a nice creamy bokeh. I would say both are equal here and that's really good for us. All is said and done. Both great lenses. Oh wait, I forgot something else. Price. I almost lost my mind (you're right): Tamron is $1,000 less. Let me say it again: $1,000 LESS! If you don't have the money to wipe your ass, that's a thousand dollars that you could use to buy another awesome lens or put it somewhere else that you could get more use out of. I don't know about you, but Tamron is clearly winning here. The price is the decisive criterion for me. You cannot revise it. I mean, if this was reversed and Canon was $1,000 less and Tamron was $1,000 more, there would never be a debate. Canon will win unconditionally. The die-hard canons will say you're crazy for $1,000 less. There would be no canon versus Tamron. But since the Tamron is a cheaper lens, which is an understatement, Tamron is now on trial and has to defend itself. Not that it was necessary. Trust me, this lens really fits the record. You can't go wrong with either lens and either will handle anything with ease. But after all is said and done, Tamron really does it for me. Glory to Tamron!