70-200 f/2.8... Canon IS2 or Tamron VC?

<p>Hi all,<br>

I primarily shoot sports, and am looking to upgrade my Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. I've been lusting after and saving up for the Canon IS2, but recently was in a local camera store and was talking to the Tamron rep, who was telling me about their new lens in the category.</p>

<p>I've read all the reviews, know about the vignetting and softness at f/f2.8 @ 200mm, etc, and I was wondering if anyone has any first hand experience on the Tamron? I have had Tamron lenses in the past, but none were fast enough on the focusing... that apparently has been fixed with their USD system.</p>

<p>Also... I was looking at LensAuthority (used equipment)... I've bought from them in the past and have been very satisfied... so $1,600 for a used Canon vs $1,500 for the Tamron new vs $2,150 for the new canon... what would be the best buy?</p>

<p>Of course this is just me and my not so humble opinion but while I've bought and sold a lot of lenses new and used I buy my Canon L lenses new. Call me superstitious or overly cautious but these are large and complex lenses that I'll probably keep and use for a long time. The last lens I bought was the excellent 24-70mm 2.8 II that I bought last year on a great rebate offer. I personally wouldn't have the Tamron lens. I considered the 24-70mm Tamron which got great reviews for about five minutes, then bought the Canon and I couldn't be happier with it. I personally use the 70-200mm 4.0 IS Canon lens and like it very much as well. If you cannot afford the new Canon lens now wait and save up for it unless you have to have one right now to make money with it. Then that's what credit cards are for. I suspect others may have differing opinions. Good luck.</p>

<p>I agree with Gil that you should stick with Canon. They really hit the mark with their 70-200's, which are the finest lenses in their class.</p>

<p>However, unlike Gil, I picked up my 70-200/4 L IS (slightly) used about a half dozen years ago, and it's been my most used and most reliable lens since. I bought my lens in a private sale, without warranty. Presumably, the retailer you're looking at offers some kind of warranty, so the sale would be relatively risk free.</p>

<p>I too would go for the Canon, although the Tamron is probably the best of the independents. $1,600 seems like an excellent price for the ver 2 Canon. It might be well-used though. I have no real problem buying s/h lenses, my only issue is whether I am actually paying significantly less. Often the reduction is only a couple of hundred $, in which case I usually feel I might as well buy new and get piece of mind. I think $1600 with no tax would be a good deal.</p>

<p>The early Sigma 70-200 EX HSM's were a very good, sharp, lens. Later versions were not as good until the present model. The only reason to 'upgrade' would be to get IS or the improvements with the use of tele converters Mk3. If this is your plan I would stick with the Canon lens, Mk2.</p>

<p>Along with second-hand lenses (my 600/4 MK II was bought used from KEH, and I've bought two used items from Lens Authority, and a used 85/1.8 from a private seller, all are in excellent condition), consider Canon refurbished lenses. </p>