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

[ExodistPhotography]

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

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

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]

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

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

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.

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]

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]

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

.................



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

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]

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

............

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..

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]

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]

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

.................



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

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+.

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]

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

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]

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

..........
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]

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

......

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]

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

......

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.

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]

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

...............
.....................

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)

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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/

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]

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...

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.

Thanks for entertaining me further.

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

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.

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!

^ 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

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]

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]

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.

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.