If you are like me, you are interested in creating great photographs but you do not make a living by selling them. If that is the case, this is a great lens for you and you will be very happy with it. Before buying this lens I looked at all the options and read all the reviews. I fought back the urge to pay twice as much for L glass, and I weighed the pros and cons of image stabilization vs a faster lens. The bottom line is I am extremely happy with this lens and I would make the same decision again. Below is a review, that made my buying decission over various canon 70-200mm L lenses:
Canon f/2.8L IS II
This is the ultimate lens in this category and if I was making a living from my photographs, it is the lens I would buy. That is not my life, however, so it was not worth the1.6 lac.
Canon f/2.8L IS
Mostly the same as above with an older IS system. Still costs 1 lac so it was still out of the question for me.
Canon f/2.8L
This was a little tougher because it is the L lens equivalent of this Tamron lens. The reality for me was that this lens still costs about twice as much(75K) for very minor improvements in sharpness and a quieter USM motor(the AF motor on the Tamron is not loud, it is just louder than a USM motor). It also has weather proofing, but since I do not allow my lenses to get wet that does not matter to me. I have owned L glass in the past and they are great lenses, but they are not twice as great by any means. My experience is that you pay about twice as much for about a 5% improvement in image quality.
Canon f/4L IS
At 69K, the trade-off with this lens is losing 1 stop of light to gain image stabilization. It was not a trade I decided to make because when you have to choose between them, available light is still more important than image stabilization. A faster shutter speed will stop camera shake, but IS will not stop a moving subject in low light(it will compensate for you moving the camera, but it will not compensate for your subject moving - only shutter speed will do that). An f/2.8 lens will give you a shutter speed that is twice as fast as an f/4 lens. There is an overlap in the benefits of shutter speed and image stabilization, but for me faster shutter speed is a benefit a greater percentage of the time. The f2.8 IS II lens listed above is the best because it has everything: f/2.8 aperture, image stabilization, and L glass; but that’s also why it costs so much.
Canon f/4L
The lure of this lens is owning an L lens for about the same price as the Tamron lens. The obvious downside is the f/4 lens is half as fast as the f/2.8 Tamron(the shutter moves half as fast for every 1 stop of light you lose in the lens). I told myself years ago that I would not by slower lenses because I invariably ended up in low-light situations when slower lenses would not get the job done. Additionally, if you ever use a 1.4x teleconverter to make the 70-200mm lens a 98-280mm lens, you lose 1 stop of light which gives you an f/5.6 lens that is very slow. The same holds true for the f/4L IS lens above.
The Tamron lens is a great lens and I have no regrets in buying it. The images are sharp and the color reproduction is great. If you have money to burn and can’t fight off the urge to buy an L lens, then knock yourself out. If you don’t have money to burn, you can have this great lens for way less money and still be very proud of your results.