I would normally say that Dustin has the best photography gear reviews, but increasingly, I think he has the ONLY reviews really worth watching. Nobody else is nearly as thorough and unbiased. Dustin covers usability, value, lab testing and real-world testing. When individual items are as expensive as these can be, you really need someone to tell you what you are about to drop your money on. These reviews are just perfect.
Just got my new Tamron 100-400 lens after seeing your review. Took a couple of handheld shots, one outdoor and one indoor... so far I'm thinking WOW, WHAT A GREAT LENS! Thanks for the review, I am sure this will be a great lens for years to come.
My copy of this lens arrived yesterday and I really love it (I ordered it after watching your review). It’s very well built, the AF is perfect, doesn’t seem to need any AF micro adjustments at all and it’s sharp. I’ll be using it for wildlife and sports :)
J Bello go check out some of my shots here instagram.com/serrsergphotography/ with this lens on my ancient 50D. I bet this lens would perform much better on a newer body
mr. Abbott, you advised me to check out the 100-400 when I asked about birds/bif shooting capabilities, initially checking out yr 70-200 2.8 review. I went through yr full 100-400 episode, checked out 100-400 Flickr page and have concluded that I prefer this lens over other options. So I want to thank you and you are in the good company of mr. Wheeler when it comes to positively reviewing the 100-400
Thanks for your detailed review. Based on your recommendation, I recently chose the Tamron 100-400 over the Sigma. In the end, I was persuaded by the optional tripod collar, wider aperture, and your comparison of autofocus accuracy and tracking performance (particularly the formal comparison in your earlier video). Since most of us can't do comparisons like this before buying, I can't tell you useful these reviews are. Thanks.
Dustin, I bought that lens to use with my D500 over a year ago, I love it. I then UPGRADED to Nikon 200-500 mm F5.6 five months ago. While the Nikon has a MARGINAL image improvement, (really need to look for it), the Tamron is FASTER in AF and easier to PAN when tracking birds (Tamron is much lighter). My average of keepers with the Tamron is over 60%, the percentage with the Nikon monster is 20% (with flying birds). The Tamron lens is great for hiking and long shooting outings, the Nikon is 500mm range and has a slight advantage, so I kept both, but always favor the Tamron. My back appreciates it on long hikes.
Excellent review of what I think is the best value "naturalist" and "birders" lens. I use the term "birder" as opposed to "bird photographer", because I mean the person likely to be primarily using binoculars and a scope, so not wanting to also carry a long lens. In other words the type of person who wants good record shots. This sort of lens is not only good for birds and mammals, but dragonflies and larger butterflies. I've got the Canon 100-400mm mkII now so probably won't be buying this after starting out with the Tamron 150-600mm version one (a good lens, but one I found just a bit too big for a general carry around lens). I think the Canon 100-400mm is right at the limit of what you want to have slung over your shoulder as you walk around, and the lighter weight of Tamron would be welcome. I also like how it achieves maximum magnification at 1.5m rather 0.95m. The optional tripod collar is a big bonus. Whilst not a heavy lens a tripod collar is much better with the lens on a tripod. It can be balance, but to me the real important is the ability to adjust the level without having to use the tilt on a tripod head.
I just received this incredible piece of kit today, 2/15/18, (along with the tripod support), particularly because of your review w/it on the 80D.. The sharpness, af speed and light weight are remarkable, indeed..!! (I also own the 18-400mm (in part due to your review) and the 2nd generation 70-200 f/2.8 VC, in addition to my longest lens the 'sleeper' Sigma 150-500mm). Dr. Abbott, thank you ever so much for your knowledgeable, detailed, in depth, common sense and time consuming review of this fine lens..
A great summary with the right measure of detail for us 'nearing over-saturation' in our quest to stay within the stretching confines of our budgets in the old' "wants vs needs" struggle. I think this lens will satisfy all my wants and needs until I develop my skill level far beyond what it is now. Great presentation, thanks for doing these videos.
hi Dustin, one more thing left to be covered, which is the Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 VC USD PLUS 1.4 tamron teleconverter performance on full frame and cropped sensor bodies !
Hi Dustin, I found your review at just the right time. I have sorted out my ultrawide and general purpose midrange zooms, and needed more reach than my excellent Tamron 70-300 Di VC could manage. I also had a sigma 105mm Macro which was virtually never used despite high hopes when I got it (perfect lens, just me not using it, that is all). After reading your review and watching this video, and the preamble videos you did, plus a bit more reading and watching elsewhere of course, I decided to sell those lenses and get this one. Wow. for the money it is amazing, and for any money it is excellent. I have a shot of a helicopter hovering over a lighthouse, taken at 400mm handheld at iso200, with vr on, and straight out of the camera, in RAW it is good. a nudge of clarity and sharpening and it pops. Thank you so much for this well considered review. Your approach is great, taking it a step at a time in an unhurried way, bringing out the gremlins as well as the positives. It made my decision so much more sure footed when I decided to go for one. If anyone is wondering if they should buy this Tamron, I would have to say, if you need the reach, or if you need the range (it is great at 100mm too) you can't go wrong, as long as your technique for using long lenses is sorted. If you find problems, look to yourself first and the lens last, as I thought I had it all off pat, but once or twice I let the shutter speed creep a little too low, and thought it was the lens, until I got the images open in Camera RAW and could see what I had done. Thanks again Dustin, a great and helpful analysis of this lens, made it so much easier for me, being a bit out in the sticks, we don't really have a camera store to try things out here so mail order and reading reviews is the order of the day unfortunately.
Thanks, excellent review. I photographed horse racing recently with a Canon group and used the Canon 100-400mm lens. I wanted a similar lens in my arsenal and picked up the Tamron equivalent.
Thanks for a great set of reviews for this lens and its competitors, Dustin. For me, it's a real shame that Tamron lenses aren't generally available for Sony E-mount without an adaptor, and we all know how badly that affects AF speed and compatibility. Now I need to seriously consider trading in the Sigma (because of the missing tripod collar [and Sigma's inablility to supply a TS-31 for a DIY bodge job (technical term!)] for the much more expensive Sony 100-400mm GM lens. I borrowed one for a few days and it was superb - sharp, fast, stable, and handled beautifully.
I've been harping at Tamron about E Mount. They claim that something is in the works. At the least I would love to see them do something like Sigma's MC-11, which works quite well with Sigma lenses.
I'm surprised to see that you don't thumb focus ? This trick of removing focus from the half press really opened up my abilities in making better photography. The thumb button for servo-AF allows for both follow action focus when keeping it pressed, and also an excellent focus and recompose for framing (the most used case for me) since the 6D this trick gave me at least 2 to 3 times more keepers in cars, fashion and concert photography.
The half-focus technique has always worked well for me...and that's even more true with the mirrorless bodies that I use now. Different strokes for different folks.
@@DustinAbbottTWI it's probably a question of taste : before that I was always changing the focus options, now I just select the center point, put on servo AF, and never change it. But by disabling half press i can focus and recompose static shots, and focus always when the target is in motion. This configuration just added abilities, without changing old habits. So i don't even think about it anymore, my brain focuses only on what when, creating something, forgetting technical stuff.
great final review of Tamron 100-400 ; at less than half the price of 100-400 II L it is a lot of lens as you pointed out. The only thing that Tamron can't match up or catch up with Canon is the Dense / Metallic Build that is so typical of Canon L White Tele Zooms & Primes, as proven by Lens Rentals guys who tear down lenses.
Great work as always Dustin. I have gotten really nice Hummingbird images with my 300mm f/4.0L IS, also with a Tamron 1.4x on the 80D. But recently I have been finding Barred-Owls and 300mm is getting too close on occasion. I only keep one DSLR and my 55-250mm STM IS has seen very little use in the last year as the 80D and grip balances well with the 300L and the bokeh is better. I am beginning to seriously consider selling both lenses and buying this Tamron. Due to the low light of searching out owls, I better rent for four days at $73 usd total. The one thing that I can see that might trip me up is the focus acquisition a half hour past sunset. The 6.3 might not be able to pick up contrasting feathers lit up with a headlamp like the 300L.
At 311mm: Canon F/5 -- At 281mm: Tamron F/6,3 -- At 234mm: Sigma F/6,3. That's why canon 100-400 mkII is the best, 2/3 of a stop is a huge difference at these focal lenghts. Lower iso or faster shutter speed is what we need with these kind of lenses. (Sports and wildlife). If you only compare the price, Tamron wins for sure. Sigma have to release an Art version of this lens to win the battle maybe, but i really doubt they'll do it soon...
I am between the Canon and the Tamron. Right now in the used market, the Canon is about $1,000 more than the Tamron. When comparing cost vs. performance, do you think that the Canon is worth the additional investment?
Thank you for the excellent review. Am interested to know about the sharpness and autofocus on a Nikon DX body. Or would the Sigma 150-600 / Nikon 200-500 be a better choice? Thanks in advance.
I'm not a Nikon reviewer, but I see no reason why the sharpness wouldn't hold up on DX. The 200-500 is very possibly sharper, but is a radically larger lens.
Owners of the Sigma seem to agree with my review - optically exceptional, but a little disappointing in the AF speed/tracking department. The lucky few that have gotten to use the Tamron already are impressed by focus abilities.
Thank you again for this Video Dustin..😊👍... In your own opinion, which one is better in Image quality performance, Sigma 100-400 or this Tamron 100-400??..
There's no clear cut answer. There's some give and take with both. That really isn't a big determining factor between them. I like the Tamron better because it had better autofocus performance.
Hi Dustin. Following on from your helpful response to my teleconverter query on your separate review I took a look at this one. Really informative and detailed. Will definitely add this lens to my wish list. As an amateur I can't justify the cost of the Canon, but this looks like the best bang for buck. Great review thanks.
Yay, confirmation received! I'm getting one as soon as possible, meaning availability and drumming up the cash at this time of year after indulging in two new Canon bodies. 🤑
Hi Justin, From your reviews it seems as if the Tamron has got an edge over the Sigma. Would you agree? Or have I missed something? I am in the market for a 100-400 and it seems as if the difference between the Tamron and Canon is not so significant as to warrant the inflated price of the Canon. In South Africa the price difference is even bigger Tamron R11k vs Canon R31k. You opinion pls...
Hello Dustin. Got my Tamron 18-400mm Pleased with it. Yes I am but it did need some micro adjustment. Fortunately the Canon 70D provided that. At the greater distances though I have found it a little soft but I guess when at 640mm because of crop factor maybe I am expecting too much.Thanks again for your advice.
Long distances have two factors to deal with - the fact that the lens isn't as sharp on the long end, and often shooting long distances you have air pockets that negatively impact image quality.
That's impossible to determine, Tim. It really depends on the specific lens and specific camera combination. I found that most lenses benefited from a bit of focus calibration on a DSLR.
For Tamron lenses it goes as follows: VC1 is the default and balances viewfinder image stabilization with the effect on the recorded image. VC2 is for panning, that is, swinging the camera and the lens so that it stays in the frame while the photo is being taken. VC3 prioritizes stabilizing the recorded image and provides no viewfinder stabilization.
Thanks! One more question. In your review of the Sigma 100-400, you mentioned that the images it produced were sometimes sharper that the Canon 100-400 II. In the Tamron review, you didn't say that. Is the Sigma any sharper than the Tamron?
Hello, I would like to buy a lens for my Canon R6 to take photos at the Zoo and in the wild. Will this Tamron with this range be enough for me or will I lack focus (or is the Tamron 150-600 better) for such photography? I don't know if 400mm on FF will be enough for smaller creatures like birds. Thank you very much for any reply.
I haven't tested this lens via adapter on the R6, but it should work fine. 400mm is pretty good for zoo distances; not always long enough for the wild.
Great review as always Dustin. I’m trying to decide wether to get the Tamron 100-400 or the Sigma 100-400. You give both lenses great reviews. I will be using the lens on a Canon EOS R5 for a mixture of wildlife, landscape and some portrait work. Image sharpness is probably the most important factor for me but I am also drawn to the Tamron due to its slightly wider aperture at the wider end. I have dismissed the Canon RF 100-400 due to it being a much slower lens. Background bokeh is important to me. Which lens would you recommend and am I right to dismiss the Canon RF lens? Thanks.
I haven't yet tested the RF 100-400, but I've actually heard mostly positive things about it. It's probably still worth considering. Between the Tamron and the Sigma, I tend to recommend the Tamron as I found it focused faster and tracked better. I haven't tested either lens adapted to RF, however.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks Dustin, that’s helpful. I have located a used Tamron in ‘as new’ condition with a 1yr warranty at around $500 US. I think it’s too good to miss. I could always trade it in for the Canon if it doesn’t work out.
Hello again Mr. Abbott, I am enjoying the 100-400mm on the 80D especially since it is lighter than my A009 and your 70-200mm G2 (I was almost tempted) by about 12oz..!! Since I shoot a lot of landscapes, I thought I would replace the A009 (cement block) for the new 22oz. lighter 70-210mm F/4.. I realize you haven't posted a review as yet (hopefully you will), but, do you have any insight on the choice, as I am loath to pull the trigger w/out your input..??
Due to your 3 part review got this for hiking along safari trail at San Diego Safari Park. Been using for 2 yrs capturing elephants, rhinos & buffaloes. Thanks
That depends on what is more important to you - the extreme reach or a more convenient size. Both are competent, but the size difference between them is significant.
Excellent review! Thank you. May I know please, between Canon 70 300 mm IS ii and Tamron 100 400mm, which one would be better for my 90D. My main objective is sharp image.
Dustin, thanks for a great review and nice to see you are still replying to comments 4 years later 👏👏 Question is, would you still give it as good a rating? I recently tried out a tamron 18- 300 and was shocked that my canon 55-250 was bringing objects much closer. You did say in your written review that you found no focus breathing but Im quite sceptical about the "400" mm. I would like to go for a 150-600 but I really think I'd bin most of the photos taken handheld.
Hi Gerry, it's important to remember that almost all the gear I review is loaned to me, so I don't necessarily have more experience with it later on. That's true here. My opinion is still the same because I don't really have new information!
Awesome review as always Dustin. I checked out this review after you mentioned the Tamron 100-400 to me as an alternative to the Sigma 100-400 for my Canon M50 Mk ii. The Tamron definitely seems like a better option for me between the two for surf photography and action shots in general after seeing your review. However, the Canon 400 f5.6 has also been recommended to me and the image quality and autofocus looks awesome on that lense for a similar price. You mentioned the Tamron should get the job done for most people when tracking. But I'm wondering if the Canon 400 prime will be far more consistent with autofocus compared to a third-party lense. What do you reckon? Thanks again 👍
Your biggest challenge with the Canon (which is quite an old lens at this point) is that it doesn't have stabilization. That's going to make it harder to work with.
What are your thoughts of a lens like this vs getting the new Tamron 70-200 G2 and throwing on a 2x converter? Theoretically that would be more versatile, since you'd still have a very nice 70-200, but could reach out to 400 if you needed it. Of course that would be adding weight to an already slightly heaver lens, and you'd be losing some light (though I think a 2.8 with a 2x converter is 5.6, so technically better).
I wasn't blown away by the IQ of the 70-200 G2 plus TC. If you are going to go that route, then purchase the Canon 70-200L II, which does better with TCs. This bare lens provides great image quality, though.
Maybe I'm too late to get an answer, but I'll take my shot: I've seen both your sigma- and tamron-review (great work, btw!); I currently own a sony alpha 7r ii with a 50mm prime and a 28mm prime, now looking to buy a tele - which one of these two would you recommend buying? I'm not an action-shooter, I mostly shoot portraits (not with 400mm, of course), landscapes, wildlife & street. Thanks in advance for any recommendations!
Are you looking to use it on your Sony body? If so, go with the Sigma + MC-11. It will adapt better. Your best option is to use the native Sony lens, but its much more expensive. I like the Tamron lens better than the Sigma in an absolute sense, but that’s on native Canon mount.
hi, thanks for your videos I really love them. I have a nikon 28-300 but I am not really happy about the image quality, do you think this tamron 100-400 would be an improvement or shallI stick with the nikon? thanks for your time
Out of the Sigma 100-400, the Tamron 100-400 and the Tamron 18-400, which would you recommend for Airshow photography? Using a Canon 750D for the RIAT Airshow this year, just looking for a lens
Hi Dustin, if you had a choice between this Tamron lens or the original Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM...which one would you get? It seems they are relatively close in price when comparing a very good condition used Canon 100-400L lens and this lens brand new.
I'd lean towards the Tamron 50-400mm for you, as it is a good value, has an amazing zoom range, and is newer technology than the Sigma 100-400mm. If you want to go with a bigger zoom I would recommend the Sigma 60-600mm DN. An amazing lens.
I recently moved from 5div to to EOSR , trying to decide between Canon 70 300 USM ii and this one does this lens supported with Canon EF to RF adapter , Fully or Partially ?
In your opinion which is best. Tamron 100-400, 18-400 or the 16-300? Looking for my first walk around lens for the 80D. Right now i have the 18-55 kit. nifty fifty and the 24 pancake. Don't like the kit at all...love the fifty !
If you don't like your kit lens, you probably aren't going to love either the 18-400 or 16-300, as, while they offer much broader focal ranges, have similar (and worse) optical limitations to your kit lens. The 100-400 is a more serious optical performer and a better match for your two prime lenses.
@@DustinAbbottTWI That is what i needed to hear since you put both through the ringer. Plus the L 100-400 which i hear is fantastic just isn't in the budget right now. Not to mention my skills don't deserve it yet lol. I am looking for good glass so when i do nail it i get the best performance. i will worry about Ls later. Thank you sir
I just got the lens today and compared it with the Canon 100-400 L ii. Basically I found the Canon to be superior optically, particularly at closer focal distances, though the Tamron did a good job on the long end. I am disappointed, however, with the image quality of the Tamron when focus is closer than 6 feet. Your mileage may vary, and of course my copy might not be representative, but that's what I've experienced comparing both lenses.
They aren’t hugely different over their shared focal range. I’d probably give a slight edge to the 100-400, but I haven’t compared them directly, and I don’t think it would be enough to be noticeable.
Hi Dustin dont know if your gonna be able to answer me but i shoot a lot of wildlife some medium size and some bird im using a Nikon Aps c im wondering if this is a good choice or the tamron 150 600 g2? thanks and have a nice year.
Either is a good choice. You need to decide how much reach you need. The 150-600 gives you more reach, but the 100-400 is smaller, lighter, and much more convenient to pack along.
Excellent review. Very helpful. I am leaning towards this over the Sigma 100-44 for a Canon M50 (+ adapter). Would you recommend the Tamron for this set up?
Hi Karen, I don't have any experience adapting either of those options onto a camera like the M50. You might need to ask Tamron (or Sigma) and see if anyone there has any experience with the combination.
Not in the next two months - my review schedule is full with: Zeiss Milvus 1.4/25mm, Sigma 16mm f/1.4 DN, Sony a7RIII, Sony 24-105mm f/4 G, Feel World Field Monitor, etc.... If there is slow spot in, say, February, I might.
Hi Dustin, great review. I bougth this lens. I am happy so far but notice that the lens does often produce unsharp images at moving targets on my 70d. It seems like the VC needs one second before it is operating 100%. Did you notice this? Also the 70d can get autofocus with lenses up to f/5.6. Does this play a role when shooting blurry shots at f/6.3? Shutter speed is at 1/250 or 1/320 so that should be fine.
f/6.3 is not relevant. Shutter speeds of 1/250th are not fast enough to stop fast action, particularly when the relative focal length on the long end with your 70D is over 600mm.
Dustin, the only thing that puts me off this lens is the need to buy and operate the tamron tap-in console. Or do I need to? I have a 5d MKII. This is why I am leaning towards the Canon 100-400 mkii, despite its price, that you can put it on the camera and go.
I asked Tamron New Zealand and they told me this: "The lens will work straight out of the box. The Tap-In console is great for fine tune adjustments but not required for the 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 VC USD to work . . . the lens is calibrated out of the box and there is no need to go beyond this. For some, it is part of the experience and that is OK. We have the ability to service the lens in the country and which includes calibrating the lens."
Mark, there isn't going to be a major difference on overlapping focal ranges, so the bigger picture (that you have to answer) is, "what is more important to me: compact size, or greater reach? " The 150-600mm lenses are significantly larger and heavier than this lens, so that's a very real consideration. If 400mm of reach is enough, then I definitely recommend this one.
Awesome review! I'm currently trying to decide between this, a used Canon 100-400 mI or a Canon 70-200 f4 with a 1.4 tc. Any advice? It will be used on my 80d
Dustin, sorry if this has been covered already but with 80+ comments I couldn't read them all! There only appeared to be 1 vc serring. How does it cope with panning? I do a lot of motorsport photography.
at 400mm, and wide open, which one is sharper, Tamron 100-400 or Sigma 100-400? I am talking center of the frame. Just for someone who wants to buy it to use for birds.....
There is very little to distinguish the two lenses in terms of image quality. They are both excellent. The Tamron has better focus speed and accuracy. I think the Sigma may do a little better on APS-C in image quality.
Dustin, thanks again for your reviews. I now know this just got placed on my wish list. One question for me is would my 70D be able to focus at 6.3? I now have a 6D mark II so I know it wouldn't be an issue.
This lens will focus on any camera. Through a little electronic trickery the focus system sees f/6.3 as f/5.6 with all such lenses and they focus fine.
i know iv whinged about 6.3 .. but im having to get one at weekend / while i save for the new nikon 180 -400 .. iv been using my nikon 70-200 ..although fast on the d850 ..cropping is great however ..the problem is thin branches seem to steal the focusing between me and the deer .. so hmmm iv decided to go for it .. for now
I would normally say that Dustin has the best photography gear reviews, but increasingly, I think he has the ONLY reviews really worth watching. Nobody else is nearly as thorough and unbiased. Dustin covers usability, value, lab testing and real-world testing. When individual items are as expensive as these can be, you really need someone to tell you what you are about to drop your money on. These reviews are just perfect.
Wow, thanks!
Just got my new Tamron 100-400 lens after seeing your review. Took a couple of handheld shots, one outdoor and one indoor... so far I'm thinking WOW, WHAT A GREAT LENS! Thanks for the review, I am sure this will be a great lens for years to come.
It's a great value lens. Enjoy
My copy of this lens arrived yesterday and I really love it (I ordered it after watching your review). It’s very well built, the AF is perfect, doesn’t seem to need any AF micro adjustments at all and it’s sharp. I’ll be using it for wildlife and sports :)
I think it is great value for money!
Sergio Serra wow I'm tempted to get one too
J Bello go check out some of my shots here instagram.com/serrsergphotography/ with this lens on my ancient 50D. I bet this lens would perform much better on a newer body
Sergio Serra wow!!! That is extraordinary work... I have a canon 5d mark ii, so I'll buy it since it works great on old cameras
Watched your reviews of this lens, I just ordered one, thank you for the in-depth, honest and unbiased review.
Enjoy!
mr. Abbott, you advised me to check out the 100-400 when I asked about birds/bif shooting capabilities, initially checking out yr 70-200 2.8 review. I went through yr full 100-400 episode, checked out 100-400 Flickr page and have concluded that I prefer this lens over other options. So I want to thank you and you are in the good company of mr. Wheeler when it comes to positively reviewing the 100-400
Glad you've enjoyed it.
Thanks for your detailed review. Based on your recommendation, I recently chose the Tamron 100-400 over the Sigma. In the end, I was persuaded by the optional tripod collar, wider aperture, and your comparison of autofocus accuracy and tracking performance (particularly the formal comparison in your earlier video). Since most of us can't do comparisons like this before buying, I can't tell you useful these reviews are. Thanks.
I’m glad that the review helped.
Dustin, I bought that lens to use with my D500 over a year ago, I love it. I then UPGRADED to Nikon 200-500 mm F5.6 five months ago. While the Nikon has a MARGINAL image improvement, (really need to look for it), the Tamron is FASTER in AF and easier to PAN when tracking birds (Tamron is much lighter). My average of keepers with the Tamron is over 60%, the percentage with the Nikon monster is 20% (with flying birds). The Tamron lens is great for hiking and long shooting outings, the Nikon is 500mm range and has a slight advantage, so I kept both, but always favor the Tamron. My back appreciates it on long hikes.
That's very interesting feedback.
May be a have a very good Tamron and a not so good Nikon. I do know that I will never let go of my Tamron, great range, light, and respectable IQ.
Excellent review of what I think is the best value "naturalist" and "birders" lens. I use the term "birder" as opposed to "bird photographer", because I mean the person likely to be primarily using binoculars and a scope, so not wanting to also carry a long lens. In other words the type of person who wants good record shots. This sort of lens is not only good for birds and mammals, but dragonflies and larger butterflies.
I've got the Canon 100-400mm mkII now so probably won't be buying this after starting out with the Tamron 150-600mm version one (a good lens, but one I found just a bit too big for a general carry around lens). I think the Canon 100-400mm is right at the limit of what you want to have slung over your shoulder as you walk around, and the lighter weight of Tamron would be welcome. I also like how it achieves maximum magnification at 1.5m rather 0.95m. The optional tripod collar is a big bonus. Whilst not a heavy lens a tripod collar is much better with the lens on a tripod. It can be balance, but to me the real important is the ability to adjust the level without having to use the tilt on a tripod head.
All solid points, and the reason I personally went from a 150-600 lens to the Canon 100-400L II
Dustin. You're the man. Love your reviews.
Thank you!
Best 3-part breakdown review with comparisons. Your reviews are the go to must for me before buying.
That's my goal!
I just received this incredible piece of kit today, 2/15/18, (along with the tripod support), particularly because of your review w/it on the 80D..
The sharpness, af speed and light weight are remarkable, indeed..!!
(I also own the 18-400mm (in part due to your review) and the 2nd generation 70-200 f/2.8 VC, in addition to my longest lens the 'sleeper' Sigma 150-500mm).
Dr. Abbott, thank you ever so much for your knowledgeable, detailed, in depth, common sense and time consuming review of this fine lens..
Enjoy the lens!
Hello Philip, can u share your experience with it ? How's the iq wide open at 400mm?
Look at DA's videos...
It's ALLLLL in there.... LOL!
I'm selling the Sigma...
Thanks again Mr. Abbott....
A great summary with the right measure of detail for us 'nearing over-saturation' in our quest to stay within the stretching confines of our budgets in the old' "wants vs needs" struggle. I think this lens will satisfy all my wants and needs until I develop my skill level far beyond what it is now. Great presentation, thanks for doing these videos.
You're welcome!
hi Dustin, one more thing left to be covered, which is the Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 VC USD PLUS 1.4 tamron teleconverter performance on full frame and cropped sensor bodies !
I'm afraid my time with the lens is up, and I don't have the Tamron TC anyway.
Has anyone found a review concerning this?
Hi Dustin, I found your review at just the right time. I have sorted out my ultrawide and general purpose midrange zooms, and needed more reach than my excellent Tamron 70-300 Di VC could manage. I also had a sigma 105mm Macro which was virtually never used despite high hopes when I got it (perfect lens, just me not using it, that is all). After reading your review and watching this video, and the preamble videos you did, plus a bit more reading and watching elsewhere of course, I decided to sell those lenses and get this one. Wow. for the money it is amazing, and for any money it is excellent. I have a shot of a helicopter hovering over a lighthouse, taken at 400mm handheld at iso200, with vr on, and straight out of the camera, in RAW it is good. a nudge of clarity and sharpening and it pops.
Thank you so much for this well considered review. Your approach is great, taking it a step at a time in an unhurried way, bringing out the gremlins as well as the positives. It made my decision so much more sure footed when I decided to go for one.
If anyone is wondering if they should buy this Tamron, I would have to say, if you need the reach, or if you need the range (it is great at 100mm too) you can't go wrong, as long as your technique for using long lenses is sorted. If you find problems, look to yourself first and the lens last, as I thought I had it all off pat, but once or twice I let the shutter speed creep a little too low, and thought it was the lens, until I got the images open in Camera RAW and could see what I had done.
Thanks again Dustin, a great and helpful analysis of this lens, made it so much easier for me, being a bit out in the sticks, we don't really have a camera store to try things out here so mail order and reading reviews is the order of the day unfortunately.
Glad to help out!
As always an excellent review full of evidence - thank you
Thanks!
Thanks, excellent review. I photographed horse racing recently with a Canon group and used the Canon 100-400mm lens. I wanted a similar lens in my arsenal and picked up the Tamron equivalent.
Enjoy your lens.
You should have more subscribers. Your reviews are solid.
Thank you.
This is a wonderful lens. I use it with my Canon 250D and I have no reason for complaint
You're reviews are really clean.
Thank you
Hi Dustin, Great reviews of the new Tamron 18-400mm lens. It is now on my shopping list. Cheers
Enjoy!
Thank you Mr. Abbott for your Review on this lens. I will be putting this lens on my list. Appreciate your reviews.
You’re welcome!
Thank you again for this great review. It is definitively helping me in my decision. Thanks
Glad to hear it.
This video helped me a lot. And helped me to decide to go for this lens. Thank you for a great explanation and review.
My pleasure!
Thanks for a great set of reviews for this lens and its competitors, Dustin. For me, it's a real shame that Tamron lenses aren't generally available for Sony E-mount without an adaptor, and we all know how badly that affects AF speed and compatibility. Now I need to seriously consider trading in the Sigma (because of the missing tripod collar [and Sigma's inablility to supply a TS-31 for a DIY bodge job (technical term!)] for the much more expensive Sony 100-400mm GM lens. I borrowed one for a few days and it was superb - sharp, fast, stable, and handled beautifully.
I've been harping at Tamron about E Mount. They claim that something is in the works. At the least I would love to see them do something like Sigma's MC-11, which works quite well with Sigma lenses.
Thank you Dustin. Your review saved me a lot of money (again)! I will buy the Tamron instead of the Canon.
I hope it works out well for you.
I'm surprised to see that you don't thumb focus ? This trick of removing focus from the half press really opened up my abilities in making better photography. The thumb button for servo-AF allows for both follow action focus when keeping it pressed, and also an excellent focus and recompose for framing (the most used case for me) since the 6D this trick gave me at least 2 to 3 times more keepers in cars, fashion and concert photography.
The half-focus technique has always worked well for me...and that's even more true with the mirrorless bodies that I use now. Different strokes for different folks.
@@DustinAbbottTWI it's probably a question of taste : before that I was always changing the focus options, now I just select the center point, put on servo AF, and never change it. But by disabling half press i can focus and recompose static shots, and focus always when the target is in motion. This configuration just added abilities, without changing old habits. So i don't even think about it anymore, my brain focuses only on what when, creating something, forgetting technical stuff.
great final review of Tamron 100-400 ; at less than half the price of 100-400 II L it is a lot of lens as you pointed out. The only thing that Tamron can't match up or catch up with Canon is the Dense / Metallic Build that is so typical of Canon L White Tele Zooms & Primes, as proven by Lens Rentals guys who tear down lenses.
The build is definitely at a higher level on Canon, and it has better light transmission that will allow it to play better with 1.4x extenders.
Much thanks for such great reviews!!
My pleasure.
Great work as always Dustin. I have gotten really nice Hummingbird images with my 300mm f/4.0L IS, also with a Tamron 1.4x on the 80D. But recently I have been finding Barred-Owls and 300mm is getting too close on occasion. I only keep one DSLR and my 55-250mm STM IS has seen very little use in the last year as the 80D and grip balances well with the 300L and the bokeh is better. I am beginning to seriously consider selling both lenses and buying this Tamron. Due to the low light of searching out owls, I better rent for four days at $73 usd total. The one thing that I can see that might trip me up is the focus acquisition a half hour past sunset. The 6.3 might not be able to pick up contrasting feathers lit up with a headlamp like the 300L.
That's a solid plan.
That feather weight 55-250mm is dirt cheap and for $100 or less, nothing comes close to it's quality or versatility..
I got my tam 100-400 today ...it's an awesome lens
Awesome. Glad you are enjoying it
At 311mm: Canon F/5 -- At 281mm: Tamron F/6,3 -- At 234mm: Sigma F/6,3. That's why canon 100-400 mkII is the best, 2/3 of a stop is a huge difference at these focal lenghts. Lower iso or faster shutter speed is what we need with these kind of lenses. (Sports and wildlife). If you only compare the price, Tamron wins for sure. Sigma have to release an Art version of this lens to win the battle maybe, but i really doubt they'll do it soon...
That's definitely a key metric!
Great review as always. Keep it up!
Thank you!
I am between the Canon and the Tamron. Right now in the used market, the Canon is about $1,000 more than the Tamron. When comparing cost vs. performance, do you think that the Canon is worth the additional investment?
That really would be up to you. The Tamron is a good value alternative, but there are certainly areas where the Canon is clearly superior.
Thank you for the excellent review. Am interested to know about the sharpness and autofocus on a Nikon DX body. Or would the Sigma 150-600 / Nikon 200-500 be a better choice? Thanks in advance.
I'm not a Nikon reviewer, but I see no reason why the sharpness wouldn't hold up on DX. The 200-500 is very possibly sharper, but is a radically larger lens.
I'd really love this lense for landscapes.
Awesome video Dustin. I was thinking in getting the Sigma lens but with this review, I think I'm now going to get the Tamron 100-400. :)
Owners of the Sigma seem to agree with my review - optically exceptional, but a little disappointing in the AF speed/tracking department. The lucky few that have gotten to use the Tamron already are impressed by focus abilities.
As always very precise, great review.
Thank you!
Thank you again for this Video Dustin..😊👍...
In your own opinion, which one is better in Image quality performance, Sigma 100-400 or this Tamron 100-400??..
There's no clear cut answer. There's some give and take with both. That really isn't a big determining factor between them. I like the Tamron better because it had better autofocus performance.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you so much for your answer..😊😊..I apreciate it a lot..😊👍👍👍
Hi Dustin. Following on from your helpful response to my teleconverter query on your separate review I took a look at this one. Really informative and detailed. Will definitely add this lens to my wish list. As an amateur I can't justify the cost of the Canon, but this looks like the best bang for buck. Great review thanks.
Definitely a solid “bang-for-the-buck” lens.
Yay, confirmation received! I'm getting one as soon as possible, meaning availability and drumming up the cash at this time of year after indulging in two new Canon bodies. 🤑
It always comes down to money, doesn't it!
Thank you so much indeed for the lovely review!
My pleasure.
Thanks for this review! I was thinking between the sigma and this ones...now I know which one I‘ll choose😀👍🏼
Enjoy!
What about the crop sensor? Do you notice a outside shadow / ring? Did you notice any loss in megapixels?
Hi Justin,
From your reviews it seems as if the Tamron has got an edge over the Sigma. Would you agree? Or have I missed something? I am in the market for a 100-400 and it seems as if the difference between the Tamron and Canon is not so significant as to warrant the inflated price of the Canon. In South Africa the price difference is even bigger Tamron R11k vs Canon R31k. You opinion pls...
That's what I would choose. The Tamron has equal image quality and better focus.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Hi Justin, thanks for you feedback. I do appreciate it. Tks Nico.
Hello Dustin. Got my Tamron 18-400mm Pleased with it. Yes I am but it did need some micro adjustment. Fortunately the Canon 70D provided that. At the greater distances though I have found it a little soft but I guess when at 640mm because of crop factor maybe I am expecting too much.Thanks again for your advice.
Long distances have two factors to deal with - the fact that the lens isn't as sharp on the long end, and often shooting long distances you have air pockets that negatively impact image quality.
I agree. I just bough the Canon 70 to 300mm F/4-5.6. Nano II on his review.
Thanks for the feedback.
Should this lens be good to go out of the box? Or is there any focusing calibration needed? - Great review!
That's impossible to determine, Tim. It really depends on the specific lens and specific camera combination. I found that most lenses benefited from a bit of focus calibration on a DSLR.
I got my tamron 100-400mm and its a really fun lens to use. I was just wondering when to use VC1 and VC2?
Use VC2 when you are panning. You can also change that behavior in the Tap In if you want a setup more for video use.
For Tamron lenses it goes as follows:
VC1 is the default and balances viewfinder image stabilization with the effect on the recorded image.
VC2 is for panning, that is, swinging the camera and the lens so that it stays in the frame while the photo is being taken.
VC3 prioritizes stabilizing the recorded image and provides no viewfinder stabilization.
Angelo Midori how sharp is the lens at 300 and 400 mm?
Hi Dustin, would you recommend this lens over a used Canon 100-400 Mark I? They can be bought for around the same price.
I think I would. The Tamron is sharper and has much better stabilization, which is a pretty big deal.
Thanks! One more question. In your review of the Sigma 100-400, you mentioned that the images it produced were sometimes sharper that the Canon 100-400 II. In the Tamron review, you didn't say that. Is the Sigma any sharper than the Tamron?
Great review Dustin. I have just won one in a contest, yea! Looking forward to receiving it.
Lucky you!
There should really be a version for m43 users.That will be effectively a 200-800mm super-tele photo lens.
That would be handy!
Hello, I would like to buy a lens for my Canon R6 to take photos at the Zoo and in the wild. Will this Tamron with this range be enough for me or will I lack focus (or is the Tamron 150-600 better) for such photography? I don't know if 400mm on FF will be enough for smaller creatures like birds. Thank you very much for any reply.
I haven't tested this lens via adapter on the R6, but it should work fine. 400mm is pretty good for zoo distances; not always long enough for the wild.
Great review as always Dustin. I’m trying to decide wether to get the Tamron 100-400 or the Sigma 100-400. You give both lenses great reviews. I will be using the lens on a Canon EOS R5 for a mixture of wildlife, landscape and some portrait work. Image sharpness is probably the most important factor for me but I am also drawn to the Tamron due to its slightly wider aperture at the wider end. I have dismissed the Canon RF 100-400 due to it being a much slower lens. Background bokeh is important to me. Which lens would you recommend and am I right to dismiss the Canon RF lens? Thanks.
I haven't yet tested the RF 100-400, but I've actually heard mostly positive things about it. It's probably still worth considering. Between the Tamron and the Sigma, I tend to recommend the Tamron as I found it focused faster and tracked better. I haven't tested either lens adapted to RF, however.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks Dustin, that’s helpful. I have located a used Tamron in ‘as new’ condition with a 1yr warranty at around $500 US. I think it’s too good to miss. I could always trade it in for the Canon if it doesn’t work out.
seems to be a pretty interesting option for shooting surf with my 70D
For sure.
How is the performance of this lens when mounted on a canon 70D body ? I'm planning to buy one for my 70D body
Hello again Mr. Abbott,
I am enjoying the 100-400mm on the 80D especially since it is lighter than my A009 and your 70-200mm G2 (I was almost tempted) by about 12oz..!! Since I shoot a lot of landscapes, I thought I would replace the A009 (cement block) for the new 22oz. lighter 70-210mm F/4..
I realize you haven't posted a review as yet (hopefully you will), but, do you have any insight on the choice, as I am loath to pull the trigger w/out your input..??
I'm starting my review of 70-210 today, so stay tuned.
Due to your 3 part review got this for hiking along safari trail at San Diego Safari Park. Been using for 2 yrs capturing elephants, rhinos & buffaloes. Thanks
I'm glad you have enjoyed it.
Hi Dustin,
I like the time you put in your videos. What would you recommend between a Tamron 100-400 and 150-600? Looking to do some wildlife soon!
That depends on what is more important to you - the extreme reach or a more convenient size. Both are competent, but the size difference between them is significant.
@Joshua Kraemer The 150-600 G2 is probably marginally sharper at 400mm, but not by any major difference.
Excellent review! Thank you. May I know please, between Canon 70 300 mm IS ii and Tamron 100 400mm, which one would be better for my 90D. My main objective is sharp image.
Both are quite sharp, though the Canon probably has the edge in autofocus
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you
Many thanks for the detailed review. I have the Canon 100-400m Mk 1 lens and this Tamron looks to be good upgrade path for me. KBO.
That sounds like a safe bet to me. You'll definitely notice a difference in the IS/VC, among other things.
Dustin, thanks for a great review and nice to see you are still replying to comments 4 years later 👏👏
Question is, would you still give it as good a rating?
I recently tried out a tamron 18- 300 and was shocked that my canon 55-250 was bringing objects much closer.
You did say in your written review that you found no focus breathing but Im quite sceptical about the "400" mm.
I would like to go for a 150-600 but I really think I'd bin most of the photos taken handheld.
Hi Gerry, it's important to remember that almost all the gear I review is loaned to me, so I don't necessarily have more experience with it later on. That's true here. My opinion is still the same because I don't really have new information!
Is this still a good lens in 2023? Would i need an adapter to use with a full frame Canon such as EOS 5D Mark 4?
If you are shooting DSLRs, there really isn't a newer lens to suggest, so definitely. And yes, you can use it without adapter on a 5DIV.
Awesome review as always Dustin. I checked out this review after you mentioned the Tamron 100-400 to me as an alternative to the Sigma 100-400 for my Canon M50 Mk ii.
The Tamron definitely seems like a better option for me between the two for surf photography and action shots in general after seeing your review. However, the Canon 400 f5.6 has also been recommended to me and the image quality and autofocus looks awesome on that lense for a similar price.
You mentioned the Tamron should get the job done for most people when tracking. But I'm wondering if the Canon 400 prime will be far more consistent with autofocus compared to a third-party lense. What do you reckon?
Thanks again 👍
Your biggest challenge with the Canon (which is quite an old lens at this point) is that it doesn't have stabilization. That's going to make it harder to work with.
What are your thoughts of a lens like this vs getting the new Tamron 70-200 G2 and throwing on a 2x converter?
Theoretically that would be more versatile, since you'd still have a very nice 70-200, but could reach out to 400 if you needed it.
Of course that would be adding weight to an already slightly heaver lens, and you'd be losing some light (though I think a 2.8 with a 2x converter is 5.6, so technically better).
I wasn't blown away by the IQ of the 70-200 G2 plus TC. If you are going to go that route, then purchase the Canon 70-200L II, which does better with TCs. This bare lens provides great image quality, though.
Maybe I'm too late to get an answer, but I'll take my shot: I've seen both your sigma- and tamron-review (great work, btw!); I currently own a sony alpha 7r ii with a 50mm prime and a 28mm prime, now looking to buy a tele - which one of these two would you recommend buying? I'm not an action-shooter, I mostly shoot portraits (not with 400mm, of course), landscapes, wildlife & street.
Thanks in advance for any recommendations!
Are you looking to use it on your Sony body? If so, go with the Sigma + MC-11. It will adapt better. Your best option is to use the native Sony lens, but its much more expensive. I like the Tamron lens better than the Sigma in an absolute sense, but that’s on native Canon mount.
hi, thanks for your videos I really love them. I have a nikon 28-300 but I am not really happy about the image quality, do you think this tamron 100-400 would be an improvement or shallI stick with the nikon? thanks for your time
I suspect you'll see a nice sharpness upgrade.
Out of the Sigma 100-400, the Tamron 100-400 and the Tamron 18-400, which would you recommend for Airshow photography? Using a Canon 750D for the RIAT Airshow this year, just looking for a lens
The Tamron 100-400 VC - it will be your best combo of autofocus performance and image quality in that price range.
Hi Dustin, if you had a choice between this Tamron lens or the original Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM...which one would you get? It seems they are relatively close in price when comparing a very good condition used Canon 100-400L lens and this lens brand new.
I would definitely buy the Tamron over the MK 1. It's a sharper lens with a much better image stabilizer.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Got it, that's what I figured haha, thank you very much!
Thanks Dustin. The Canon doesn't feature in my budget constraint. looks like I will go for the Tamron over the sigma.
The strength of this lens is for people just like you. It gives a very credible budget alternative.
Can you tell me if getting a 1.4 extender for this lens to get a little more reach is worth getting? What is your opinion
I don't recall this lens being compatible with TCs. You might want to confirm that with Tamron first.
Dustin, merci pour toutes ces vidéos !.. Je suis de Belgique et vous êtes ma référence quand je me pose des questions sur le matériel photo ...
Merci
Planing to buy telephoto lens which do you recommend. Tamron or Sigma and why? For my Sony A7lV
I'd lean towards the Tamron 50-400mm for you, as it is a good value, has an amazing zoom range, and is newer technology than the Sigma 100-400mm. If you want to go with a bigger zoom I would recommend the Sigma 60-600mm DN. An amazing lens.
I recently moved from 5div to to EOSR ,
trying to decide between Canon 70 300 USM ii and this one
does this lens supported with Canon EF to RF adapter , Fully or Partially ?
To my knowledge it is fully supported. Tamron has been issuing firmware updates to make sure their lenses work properly.
In your opinion which is best. Tamron 100-400, 18-400 or the 16-300? Looking for my first walk around lens for the 80D. Right now i have the 18-55 kit. nifty fifty and the 24 pancake. Don't like the kit at all...love the fifty !
If you don't like your kit lens, you probably aren't going to love either the 18-400 or 16-300, as, while they offer much broader focal ranges, have similar (and worse) optical limitations to your kit lens. The 100-400 is a more serious optical performer and a better match for your two prime lenses.
@@DustinAbbottTWI That is what i needed to hear since you put both through the ringer. Plus the L 100-400 which i hear is fantastic just isn't in the budget right now. Not to mention my skills don't deserve it yet lol. I am looking for good glass so when i do nail it i get the best performance. i will worry about Ls later. Thank you sir
Great review Dustin. I just wonder if you have tried it with the 1.4x converter on the 80D? And if they work well together?
I haven’t. I didn’t have the Tamron 1.4x at the time of the review, and the Tamron f/6.3 zooms don’t really autofocus very well with Canon extenders.
I just got the lens today and compared it with the Canon 100-400 L ii. Basically I found the Canon to be superior optically, particularly at closer focal distances, though the Tamron did a good job on the long end. I am disappointed, however, with the image quality of the Tamron when focus is closer than 6 feet. Your mileage may vary, and of course my copy might not be representative, but that's what I've experienced comparing both lenses.
I think that is the tradeoff for the Canon's major focus breathing. Those "floating elements" often allow better close focus performance.
Otherwise your review was bang-on, and I appreciate your help! May it always be well with you. Happy New Year!
Hello Dustin , great review . Please let me know which lens is optically sharper the tamron 150-600mm g2 or the new tamron 100-400mm .
They aren’t hugely different over their shared focal range. I’d probably give a slight edge to the 100-400, but I haven’t compared them directly, and I don’t think it would be enough to be noticeable.
Dustin Abbott ok thank you !
Hi Dustin dont know if your gonna be able to answer me but i shoot a lot of wildlife some medium size and some bird im using a Nikon Aps c im wondering if this is a good choice or the tamron 150 600 g2? thanks and have a nice year.
Either is a good choice. You need to decide how much reach you need. The 150-600 gives you more reach, but the 100-400 is smaller, lighter, and much more convenient to pack along.
Ok thanks for the answer, have a good day Dustin.
Dustin, would you recommend Tamron 100-400mm over Sigma 100-400?
I have often done so, yes, mostly because the lenses are fairly equal optically but the Tamron focuses better.
I have zeroed down on the Tamron 100-400mm . Does it need to be configured ?
That will depend on the individual lens and camera. You can determine if focus is consistent on your camera and lens.
Excellent review. Very helpful. I am leaning towards this over the Sigma 100-44 for a Canon M50 (+ adapter). Would you recommend the Tamron for this set up?
100-400 that should read....
Hi Karen, I don't have any experience adapting either of those options onto a camera like the M50. You might need to ask Tamron (or Sigma) and see if anyone there has any experience with the combination.
Great review Dustin, thanks.
Do not plan to review Irix 11/4?
Not in the next two months - my review schedule is full with: Zeiss Milvus 1.4/25mm, Sigma 16mm f/1.4 DN, Sony a7RIII, Sony 24-105mm f/4 G, Feel World Field Monitor, etc....
If there is slow spot in, say, February, I might.
Hey dustin tnx for review
Do you think the lens can work good with canon m50 with an adaptor for wildlife and surfing ?
I really have no idea how effective that combination would be without having tested it.
Hi Dustin, great review. I bougth this lens. I am happy so far but notice that the lens does often produce unsharp images at moving targets on my 70d. It seems like the VC needs one second before it is operating 100%. Did you notice this? Also the 70d can get autofocus with lenses up to f/5.6. Does this play a role when shooting blurry shots at f/6.3? Shutter speed is at 1/250 or 1/320 so that should be fine.
f/6.3 is not relevant. Shutter speeds of 1/250th are not fast enough to stop fast action, particularly when the relative focal length on the long end with your 70D is over 600mm.
Hi dustin, no it was not fast action. People walking and a cat very slowly walking. Should i use higher shutter speeds for that?
I would experiment with it. Longer focal lengths really emphasize motion blur.
very good review Dustin $648 on Amazon my next leans for sure thanks for the honest review, 4 thumbs up!!
Glad I could help!
Very nice review. I have a question. Is there any reason I would want this lens, when I already have the Tamron 18-400mm VC?
If you're happy with what you have, no, but the 100-400 VC is in a completely different class optically.
what is your view of this lens compared to the 18-400? I'm planning the use for football/band/outdoor events
The 100-400 is the much sharper lens and will track action better.
But if you only have one body the zoom range helps a lot. If you're fiddling with your equipment you might loose a shot.
Sir I have canon 700D. which you recommended Sigma 100-400 or Tamron 100-400?
I found the Tamron to have better focus, and they were roughly equal optically, so I'd go Tamron.
Dustin, the only thing that puts me off this lens is the need to buy and operate the tamron tap-in console. Or do I need to? I have a 5d MKII. This is why I am leaning towards the Canon 100-400 mkii, despite its price, that you can put it on the camera and go.
I think buying the Tap In is wise for those that want to get the most out of their investment, but it is certainly not required.
is it hard to use the tap in for people who don't know how to callibrate, or does it automatically callibrate the lens.
I asked Tamron New Zealand and they told me this: "The lens will work straight out of the box. The Tap-In console is great for fine tune adjustments but not required for the 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 VC USD to work . . . the lens is calibrated out of the box and there is no need to go beyond this. For some, it is part of the experience and that is OK. We have the ability to service the lens in the country and which includes calibrating the lens."
Is the image quality and focus as good or better than the 150-600 g2. Which would you choose if you had to make a choice. Thanks
Mark, there isn't going to be a major difference on overlapping focal ranges, so the bigger picture (that you have to answer) is, "what is more important to me: compact size, or greater reach? " The 150-600mm lenses are significantly larger and heavier than this lens, so that's a very real consideration. If 400mm of reach is enough, then I definitely recommend this one.
Oh just seeing that comment. That 150-600 is really big and I would imagine a bit slower to focus than the 100-400. 🤔 choices are hard 😩
Awesome review! I'm currently trying to decide between this, a used Canon 100-400 mI or a Canon 70-200 f4 with a 1.4 tc. Any advice? It will be used on my 80d
I would recommend this lens among those options.
Dustin, sorry if this has been covered already but with 80+ comments I couldn't read them all! There only appeared to be 1 vc serring. How does it cope with panning? I do a lot of motorsport photography.
There are actually two VC setting (they are both on the same switch). You can further alter behavior if you have the Tap In console.
So helpful, thanks a lot, Dustin!
You're welcome.
at 400mm, and wide open, which one is sharper, Tamron 100-400 or Sigma 100-400? I am talking center of the frame. Just for someone who wants to buy it to use for birds.....
There is very, very little difference between the lenses at 400mm, center of frame. Tamron is a little stronger on the edges.
Hi, great review , i'm thinking between sigma and tamron, what u think according to your test between them in image qulity?
There is very little to distinguish the two lenses in terms of image quality. They are both excellent. The Tamron has better focus speed and accuracy. I think the Sigma may do a little better on APS-C in image quality.
Dustin, thanks again for your reviews. I now know this just got placed on my wish list. One question for me is would my 70D be able to focus at 6.3? I now have a 6D mark II so I know it wouldn't be an issue.
This lens will focus on any camera. Through a little electronic trickery the focus system sees f/6.3 as f/5.6 with all such lenses and they focus fine.
Thanks
Hi Justin
Please guide me which I need to buy tamron or sigma? I need ur suggestion. I will buy as per ur advise. Please help me to choose.
I prefer the Tamron over the Sigma here.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for your suggestion and reply.
i know iv whinged about 6.3 .. but im having to get one at weekend / while i save for the new nikon 180 -400 .. iv been using my nikon 70-200 ..although fast on the d850 ..cropping is great however ..the problem is thin branches seem to steal the focusing between me and the deer .. so hmmm iv decided to go for it .. for now
It's actually quite a good lens.
May I ask is the 100-400 have better performance on trucking compare with 150-600 g2? thanks a lot!!
I didn't test the 150-600 G2 in the same conditions, so I'm not sure. I think that it is possible, however.
Would the weight of that lens over stress the mount if you dangle it off your shoulder?
Not particularly. This is not a hugely heavy lens.
Hi just a question I thought about investing in glass firs rather than body, is there any problem if I get it on a t6i rebel ?
It will work just fine there.