Their 28-200 superzoom is incredible. It's the only lens I'll bring on a trip if I just want to take photos. This 50-400 sounds like it would be fun to complement a 16-35.
@@OnIcePerspectives the one I really want is the 35mm - 150mm f/2 - 2.8. That one ☝️ too me is just a one shot event or utility lens. Not gonna blow out the background like a super fast prime or be “as” sharp but this will get the job done
@@OnIcePerspectives Agree 100%. Got the 28-200 and absolutely love it. THE lens to bring on multi day hikes or any other situation where you just want to bring one lens, save weight/space or just don't want to switch lenses all the time. Very sharp too. I'm still interested in the 50-400 tho, for days when I know I'll shoot more into telephoto territory. But maybe I'm just fooling myself, with the 28-200 in my possession the 50-400 could become a dust collector 🤔
Not sure if they are underrated. If you follow the industry I think it is obvious that brands like Tamron and Sigma have become serious players. I love that Sigma stated that they won't outsource their manufacturing.
I wish that they build something like the Canon RF 14-35mm f4 for E mount. There currently don't exists any E-mount ultrawide lenses that accept screw on filters. Nikon also has the amazing 14-30mm and there is hope that this lens will be available on Z mount later. For me personally I am afraid the 20mm is not quite wide enough for all situations, although I do like the extra stop of light if I do want to shoot nightscapes (but 2.8 is still a bit slow for proper astro, it at least makes something possible for the not too critical eye)
Exactly what i was missing in my trip at capo verde to shoot whales. 20-40 perfect for hiking and landscape and this would have same me crop into my photos.
This is the perfect lens for zoo photography in my opinion. I love my 200-600, but on larger or very close animals, the 200 mm lower limit is way too much, and changing lenses all the time is annoying and slow, not to mention the dust problem. This lens could probably do 95 % of my zoo images. I personally do not think the difference between 400 and 600 mm is that important compared to be able to get the closer shot.
I’d also recommend watching Dustin Abbott’s Final Review. IMO, one of the most thorough lens reviewers out there. But I always check out Chris’s reviews, and also Jared Polin. When I see a consensus thumbs up from all three, I’m always sure it’s a lens worth considering!
Oh good call. I watched part of Polin’s and Stefan Malloch’s as well. Just got the lens in today and it’s beefy! Pretty stoked to play around with it this weekend. I’m excited about the massive range.
Oh god, how i miss the E-mount and these tamron new lenses... Regret moving to RF that blocked any hope of having third party lenses like tamron that latelly is releasing such nice lenses
My thoughts also, a two lens setup. But I'll take the 16-35pz instead of the gm. Or maybe even just the Sigma 16-28. This lens seems perfect for landscape. But I might keep my Tamron 28-200 as a lightweight option. I just love that lens.
Makes a lot of sense, sounds like a great combo. But if you already have these 3 lenses I wouldn't be sprinting to change this. Before you know it next year Tamron releases a 16-50 F2.8-4 and you are crying again :)
Can't wait to see this come to the X mount. 50 is great for a crop sensor and 600 equivalent at the long end coupled with the more compact and lighter design than the 100-400 XF(albeit that one being a 5.6) I think this would sell well for the Fuji's. I'd certainly buy one since I don't do hardcore wildlife. This would be great for my local zoos and motorsport tracks along with maybe their 17-70 2.8 and perhaps a wider prime if need be. Let's hope they bring it to the X mount.
So, no chitchat about video usability from Jordo? One use case I could see for this type of lens would be making videos where you need a variety of shots but have to keep the camera in a fixed position (e.g. outdoor sports events.)
"Some" weather resistance = gaskets and seals throughout the design plus fluorinated front element. It's better sealed against the the outside world than many supposedly premium lenses from other manufacturers. This lens has joined my 35-150 f/2-2.8 as my two lens, go-to, every day setup. The 35-150 goes on my Nikon Z with the Megadap ETZ21 adapter and the 50-400 goes on the A7iii/A7rIV. A perfect pairing.
I am picking up the 50-400 today or tomorrow, mostly for daytime sideline sports, and general outdoor use, such as hiking and maybe some wildlife. Adding it to my 35-150 (love this lens, which covers family, street, and low light!) and the Tamron 17-28. Got it all covered. Will be selling my Tamron 150-500 - it’s just a little too bulky for the shooting I most often do.
@@sokkerjeff I'm very interested in your experience with the 50-400. Thinking about getting it for the same reasons you got yours. Are you happy with the results you get?
This is the kind of lens that makes you invest in a system. Pair this with a wide zoom and an optional fast prime if you must and you're all set. Or you could just make this your one and done. So many possibilities.
Nice Review.. But, just wish they weren't always on the latest super-duper high end camera body's.. I know this will help explain what the lens can do when pushed.. But most of us are limited in what we can spend and will try and get the most out of it by buying good lenses to go on our older camera body's rather than new body's with older lenses..So reviews on a7r 2s & 3s and such like would be nice too..
Don’t overestimate what bodies can do. It’s just a hole and a sensor lol. The results for the samples in this test would not be appreciably different on an A7C. file handling with giant pixel counts is a headache too. Fancy bodies, give you more speed and convenience, but they can’t make a better photograph. I haven’t shot this particular lens, but I have the 70 to 180, the original version with no stabilization, and it is in my every gig bag as a part-time pro. My main body is a first generation a nine I bought used, use e Shutter almost all the time so it could ostensibly last forever lol.
Nice review. As a landscape photographer I've been using my Sigma 100-400 EF (Canon lens) with an adapter to my Sony A7R4 (61 megapixels) and in crop mode it delivers 26 megapixels at 600mm equivalent. I just came back from a trip to Iceland, using this combination both to photograph an erupting volcano and also puffins. It all worked as a sharm and for puffins I got so many razor sharpo images even without cropping. The auto-focus however is slow and misses a lot so bird-in-flight photography became quiete frustrating. This focal length is ideal to use one lens for more shots that currently, limiting the chance of dust on the sensor. Fast auto-focus will make it versatile as well. This size and weight will probably make it into my photobag where I'll have 2nd thoughts for a 150-600 lens
35-150 and the 150-500 Tamron have me covered. so I don't need one. the 35-150 is my favorite lens I lOVE it! I might have been interested if I didn't have what I have...
Yes, very much so! But, you must understand that the depth of field will not change, it will simply enlarge the frame. However, I don't see anything wrong with this. Just my opinion...
Great review. I already own a Sony 24-105 GM lens, so a better choice for me is probably the Sony 100-400 GM. I'd have my entire range of photography in two lenses. What do you think?
Sony is twice as expensive as Tamron. Sony can do also 30fps on A1. I wonder how IQ compared. By the way: it doesn’t matter to have 24-105 and 50-400. Zooms focal lengths could overlap.
Man why nobody bothers to make em indeed? Aren't we stuffed with a ton of repetitive zooms? Bring us cheap and light weight tele primes! ISO needs 400mm f5.6 lens which is around 700-800g or even a 200mm f2.8 with less weight.
2022 best lenses should probably go to every e mount lenses reased this year. The sony 16-35 F4 is amazingly compact and lightweight but offers superb image quality with minimum focus breathing The 15mm 1.4, 11mm 1.8 and the 10-20 F4 are all superb ultra wide angle lenses for aps-c line up (only if they can release a proper aps-c camera that doesn't use the fossilized 24mp sensor) The 24-70 g master showed that it justifies the expensive price compared to the third party versions Viltrox 13mm F1.4 is a perfect alternative for people who think that the 15mm F1.4 G lens isn't wide enough Tokina 11-18 is a great alternative to the 10-20 and Tamron 11-20 The sigma 20mm and 24mm are great cheaper alternatives to the 20mm F1.8 and 24mm F1.4 The signa 16-28 is excellent alternative to the tamron 17-28 and the new 16-35 F4 PZ Samyang's 2nd gen 35mm, 85mm are the best valued 1.4 primes and the 135mm 1.8 is the cheapest of it's kind while taking superb images The only lens that sucks is the Meike 85 F1.8 with the most chromatic aberration I've seen for the past 10 years.
Love your content, long time follower. Thank you for everything that you do. Question though, what's up with using Noct to measure weight? Why not just grams. Noct seems to mean several completely different things. It's kind of confusing. Maybe it's just me.... Thanks again.
Now this lens is coming to Z mount it’s competing against the 28-400. On balance I think I’d prefer to have this and a wide prime like the viltrox 20mm
Why don't reviewers talk about the Sony 100-400 GM with the 1.4x TC? I know it's expensive glass but it seems like it would have incredible versatility. Especially given that you can get a 98-280mm f4 from a 70-200 f2.8 GM as well.
You have to understand that this is a new product, so reviews are coming for it to show people the lens capabilities and its alternatives before buying it. That does not mean the Sony 100-400 were not reviewed when it came out. Why people do not talk about it in this review : why do they not talk about the sigma 100-400 as well ? They just picked the better options for focal length since all those lenses are sharp. And in this video they talk about wildlife. IMHO 400 is not enough telephoto for wildlife Anyway the 100-400 is expensive! Since covid-19 and the war in Ukraine things are getting more expensive in other countries than US, plus the shipping and tax we have to pay (I'm one of them). I also think that keeping the money for travelling is better if the image result will be the same and with weather sealing in the end. I own the sigma 100-400 and this is one of my sharpest lenses. Plus it has very good OS. For the price you pay, you can get similar results paying less. The GM has better AF though, and so does the Tamron and Sigma with Sony newer bodies even if less better.
The dirt-cheap Sigma 100-400 C works great with a 1.4 TC, so a worthy competitor. It is slightly slow when focusing, and isn't as dust-resistant as I would have liked, but other than that I have no issues at all!
@@ErikssonTord_2 the DSLR version of the contemporary (the mirrorless does not have a compatible teleconverter due to Sony's block on third party converters) is nowhere near the same class as the new 50-400. It's quite literally not a fair comparison in anything other than the zoom range.
@@ErikssonTord_2 given the differences in design, I don't think I'd use any lens not designed for mirrorless. I just think that it loses out on many of the benefits of the system. I also didn't come into mirrorless with any lenses since my previous DSLR was APS-C.
Nixe video. This lens is definitely more comparable to Sony 70-400mm G ssm than the Bigma 50-500mm HSM. Sony should have had repeated the 70-400mm format on E-mount instead of going to 100mm at the wide end anyway...
@@zegzbrutal Nice joke! The combo costs even more and even not on par in quality. And well you're killing the benefit of having one to rule them all anyway!
@@shahabh2108 I wouldn't start this 'joke' if there isn't another pointless RF slander from "/ad in a E mount lens review video. And depends on where you live, both RF 100-400 and Tamron EF 35-150 cost 400USD equivalent in HJ. Both lens together is still cheaper than Tamron 50-400.
Wow, you sometimes sound like a true street photographer - meaning you don't usually use big telephotos and don't really know use cases for such a lens. 😉 First, this is actually amazingly lightweight. Competitors ("Bigmas" 50-500mm or 60-600mm) are about a kilogram heavier. The Sony 200-600 you'd consider for wildlife photography is almost twice as heavy, yet still doesn't get any wider than f/6.3. Second, I can think of a few situations for which "normal-to-supetelephoto" is an absolute must-have, worth any compromises you'd have to make: group wildlife and airshow photography. When you have deers spread across a field, you just NEED to be able to get down to 50mm to shoot the whole herd. Same when the Blue Angels suddenly break away from each other, or when a water bomber drops its load. You can always crop (especially using an α7R or α1), but you can't get past that "hey, 150mm is just too long" when the 787 flies by right after F/A-18s, or when the buck tries to get closer to the doe, and you want the whole lot in the picture… 😅 As those are common subjects for me, I wouldn't trade my 50-500mm for a 150-anything, even to save me $800 and 1kg. I actually started considering switching to Sony right after Tamron announced the 50-400mm, and it's no coincidence. Third, the f/6.3 aperture is actually quite common for 400mm+ lenses, and the recent trend even slips toward f/7 or even f/8. So it's actually a nice surprise Tamron managed to keep it. The only f/5.6-or-faster lenses past 400mm are WAY more expansive (twice the price for the Sony and Nikon 100-400s, which are just f/5.6, five times the price for 200-400mm f/4, despite their awfully long "wide-angle" position…) So I'd argue that the new Tamron is rather fast for its price and range. Otherwise, thanks a lot for the interesting feedback about handling, focusing and sharpness. You did a good job selling it: now I can't wait to put my hands on this one and an α7R IV, to try them in my woods, where it's gonna be mating season for roe deers very soon. 😉
almost a direct analogue of the Olympus 12-200. impressive range, but if only it could go wider. also 1:57 tfw your local theatres will never have a big gay anime night showing
I guess it's meant to be used as a walk around, but for Telephoto, why don't we just use the 150-500mm from Tamron? Then if you pair that up with 35-150mm, you cover a better range with better results.
Mainly because the 150-500 is nearly 1.5lbs heavier. The 50-400 replaced my 150-500 in my bag almost exclusively for this reason... That and the Lens Utility programmability. I prefer the 50-400's ability to override the by-wire focusing motor. Setting my personal preference for a 180° rack from MOD to infinity lends a consistency that is hard to express. I love the 150-500 and it will continue to be my go-to for serious wildlife work but the 50-400 is simply more useful for day to day.
I am really interested into this lens but I wouls still buy some prime to complement this because it gets dark fast especially during winter. I tried to film at f4.5 in the evening with my 20mmg and i can say it is dark All in all sony really has unique spectre of wonderful lenses
I've got a bone to pick.As an old guy, enthusiast, I'm in the market to replace my Sony 70-350mm. Yeah, 600mm would be nice, but for me the size/weight trade off is a no deal. What I find interesting is that in every review I watch , for lenses in this category, there is always this same criticism. Slow f6.3 aperture at the long end, higher ISO, yada yada yada.. Guess what. The only lens that I could find even similar, with an aperture faster than f6.3 is the Sony 100-400 GM which is f5.6. Not a huge difference, I think, particularly at 2x the price, no 50mm at the wide end, 200gm heavier, and much inferior close up capabilities. It's not just this lens that gets that knock, but every other lens in the class. So, I'm waiting for a reviewer to suggest a super telephoto with same size, same reach, and similar cost, as a faster option. Still waiting a year later.😉
Meh. You failed to mention the updated “bigma”, 60-600mm sport which is also weather sealed and adaptable to mirrorleas and has the same f4.5 to f6.3 aperture. I have the 50-500 and would take 200mm more on the long end and give away 10mm at the wide end any day. The Tamron seems pretty underwhelming if you ask me.
The AF performance difference alone makes the Tamron a better option. As does the better stabilization. It's also far more versatile for video purposes thanks to its extensive programmability. Then there's the massive weight difference of nearly 3.5lbs. Also: if the MTF charts hold true, the Tamron is higher resolution throughout the range. Lastly: it's mirrorless native. 60-600 is definitely useful if one needs the range but the 50-400 wins on nearly every other metric.
Looking at a fairly random option (Jessops here in the UK) the Bigma retails for £1899 and that's without any adapters. The Tamron is up for £1249. That plus the weight difference (2.7 kg! for the Bigma vs 1.1 kg for the Tamron) means that to all intents and purposes, these two lenses are not remotely aimed at the same audience.
Good review. You keep it interesting and fun as always. I already have the Sigma 100-400 (cheap, good stabilization and super sharp). But as you mentioned the 600 mm is good for wildlife. And not only wildlife but landscape/seascape as well, so I'm thinking about getting the sigma 150-600 which seems to be faster and have better AF than the 100-400 version. Poor Canon anyway
The Sigma 150-600 S is an outstanding lens, with amazingly fast focus and very little to worry about. Very durable, dust-proof (my copy has been that since day one, which is not true for my Sigma 100-400 C!). Unless you have a really beefy camera, you might want to exchange the tripod mount, or use a rail to be able to balance it on your gimbal. The only issue with this lens is its weight, and that the C.G. (Center of Gravity) moves a lot when you zoom in/out. The Sigma 60-600 S is slightly lighter, and the C.G. doesn't move about as much! But costs a couple of thousands more!
Was very disappointed with the sigma and went on to the 200-600 and also have the tamron 150-500 which is an excellent lens though a bit dark at the wide end. The sigma I found slow and cumbersome to use and not well balanced.
@@zegzbrutal GM's AF is not "much faster." They are in fact highly comparable in this regard. As is the resolution performance from front to back where the Tamron actually has the edge at the wide end and the GM has the edge at the 400mm marker, but only noticeable zoomed at 200% in post production. The GM is 10oz heavier due to its construction. The major advantages offered by the GM are the ability to use teleconverters (Sony blocks third party from doing so) and the ability to support higher than 15/20fps burst rates on the sports bodies (Sony also blocks third party lenses from supporting 30fps). The Tamron is more programmable for video including iris control and linear MF performance, breathes less naturally than the GM, and has the macro capability. The GM may be worth double the price for some but the Tamron is uniquely suited to compete head to head. Also: Sony owns a percentage of Tamron. Tamron's lenses are allowed full lens compensation protocols on Sony bodies. The partnership goes back a long, long ways.
The Sigma 60-600 is a 6lb lens. The Tamron 50-400 is 2.6lb. There's absolutely no comparison in weight. This lens is lighter than most 70-200 f/2.8 lenses by nearly half a pound and is 10oz lighter than the Sony 100-400 GM. Carrying it all day is a breeze.
I love that Tamron is doing all these interesting zoom designs that no one else does. Reminds of what Laowa did with primes
I love how you guys are consistent in using noct as a unit on weight.
noct: at least it makes us google :)
Wow! Tamron is on a Roll here. All theyr'e new lenses are performing great.
Now even such a superzoom. Incredible!
You’ve won Text me for your… just kidding 😂. Yeah Tamron is on a roll. There make what photographers actually want and need.
Exactly 💯. I just hope nikon rebadge this great lens 🙂
Their 28-200 superzoom is incredible. It's the only lens I'll bring on a trip if I just want to take photos. This 50-400 sounds like it would be fun to complement a 16-35.
@@OnIcePerspectives the one I really want is the 35mm - 150mm f/2 - 2.8. That one ☝️ too me is just a one shot event or utility lens. Not gonna blow out the background like a super fast prime or be “as” sharp but this will get the job done
@@OnIcePerspectives Agree 100%. Got the 28-200 and absolutely love it. THE lens to bring on multi day hikes or any other situation where you just want to bring one lens, save weight/space or just don't want to switch lenses all the time. Very sharp too. I'm still interested in the 50-400 tho, for days when I know I'll shoot more into telephoto territory. But maybe I'm just fooling myself, with the 28-200 in my possession the 50-400 could become a dust collector 🤔
It is Tamron, Sigma, and Samyang that create innovative lenses. Third-party manufacturers are underrated these days.
Tell it to Canon…
Not sure if they are underrated. If you follow the industry I think it is obvious that brands like Tamron and Sigma have become serious players. I love that Sigma stated that they won't outsource their manufacturing.
Samyang AF 35, 50, 85 f1.4 FE II are amazing (I wish it redesign the barrel size of the 35 II though). 135 f1.8 is simply brilliant!
tell this to Canon :)
@@erichramone7812 you love to misuse "too" huh?
Wow, 1'55 into the video and the cinema behind is doing Big Gay night , then straight into Bigma. Respect.
Tamron seems to be on a roll lately. This along with the 20-40/2.8 is an unbeatable combo for travelling light.
I wish that they build something like the Canon RF 14-35mm f4 for E mount. There currently don't exists any E-mount ultrawide lenses that accept screw on filters. Nikon also has the amazing 14-30mm and there is hope that this lens will be available on Z mount later. For me personally I am afraid the 20mm is not quite wide enough for all situations, although I do like the extra stop of light if I do want to shoot nightscapes (but 2.8 is still a bit slow for proper astro, it at least makes something possible for the not too critical eye)
Exactly what i was missing in my trip at capo verde to shoot whales. 20-40 perfect for hiking and landscape and this would have same me crop into my photos.
This is the perfect lens for zoo photography in my opinion. I love my 200-600, but on larger or very close animals, the 200 mm lower limit is way too much, and changing lenses all the time is annoying and slow, not to mention the dust problem. This lens could probably do 95 % of my zoo images. I personally do not think the difference between 400 and 600 mm is that important compared to be able to get the closer shot.
Perfect for firework too.
This+ apsc sony body is perfect for zooms, using jpeg mode give 50% more zoom on top of 1.5x crop, insane.
I just ordered this lens last night on B&H but hadn’t found the DPReview video. Here it is! Now I’ll watch it and hope my purchase isn’t destroyed 😂
I’d also recommend watching Dustin Abbott’s Final Review. IMO, one of the most thorough lens reviewers out there. But I always check out Chris’s reviews, and also Jared Polin. When I see a consensus thumbs up from all three, I’m always sure it’s a lens worth considering!
Oh good call. I watched part of Polin’s and Stefan Malloch’s as well.
Just got the lens in today and it’s beefy! Pretty stoked to play around with it this weekend. I’m excited about the massive range.
Oh god, how i miss the E-mount and these tamron new lenses... Regret moving to RF that blocked any hope of having third party lenses like tamron that latelly is releasing such nice lenses
Never too late to come back.
I want to change my 3 lens setup (Sigma 14-24, Sony 24-105, Sigma 100-400) to a 2 lens setup (Sony 16-35 GM, Tamron 50-400) for mostly landscape.
My thoughts also, a two lens setup. But I'll take the 16-35pz instead of the gm. Or maybe even just the Sigma 16-28. This lens seems perfect for landscape. But I might keep my Tamron 28-200 as a lightweight option. I just love that lens.
Makes a lot of sense, sounds like a great combo. But if you already have these 3 lenses I wouldn't be sprinting to change this. Before you know it next year Tamron releases a 16-50 F2.8-4 and you are crying again :)
Dude this is literally what I am planning to do XD just I want to throw some 85mm fast lens into the mic
I wouldn't sell the 24-105 though, there are gonna be occasions you wanna go out with just one (light) lens, I guess
Ok.
1:57 LUL the cinema billboard in the background 😂😂
Jordan's usually very good at grading. Did he do this video? The red and violet flowers from 4:26 onwards are way oversaturated.
Can't wait to see this come to the X mount. 50 is great for a crop sensor and 600 equivalent at the long end coupled with the more compact and lighter design than the 100-400 XF(albeit that one being a 5.6) I think this would sell well for the Fuji's. I'd certainly buy one since I don't do hardcore wildlife. This would be great for my local zoos and motorsport tracks along with maybe their 17-70 2.8 and perhaps a wider prime if need be. Let's hope they bring it to the X mount.
I hope it'll happen someday but I wonder if fuji really wants it competing with the 100-400 and 70-300.
So, no chitchat about video usability from Jordo? One use case I could see for this type of lens would be making videos where you need a variety of shots but have to keep the camera in a fixed position (e.g. outdoor sports events.)
"Some" weather resistance = gaskets and seals throughout the design plus fluorinated front element. It's better sealed against the the outside world than many supposedly premium lenses from other manufacturers. This lens has joined my 35-150 f/2-2.8 as my two lens, go-to, every day setup. The 35-150 goes on my Nikon Z with the Megadap ETZ21 adapter and the 50-400 goes on the A7iii/A7rIV. A perfect pairing.
I am picking up the 50-400 today or tomorrow, mostly for daytime sideline sports, and general outdoor use, such as hiking and maybe some wildlife. Adding it to my 35-150 (love this lens, which covers family, street, and low light!) and the Tamron 17-28. Got it all covered. Will be selling my Tamron 150-500 - it’s just a little too bulky for the shooting I most often do.
@@sokkerjeff I'm very interested in your experience with the 50-400. Thinking about getting it for the same reasons you got yours. Are you happy with the results you get?
This is the kind of lens that makes you invest in a system. Pair this with a wide zoom and an optional fast prime if you must and you're all set. Or you could just make this your one and done. So many possibilities.
For example this and Tamron's other new 20-40mm 2.8 would leave you almost no gap (40mm to 50mm easily croppable) and cover a humongous range.
Mine was delivered today from B&H!!
Are you happy with how the lens performs?
Nice Review.. But, just wish they weren't always on the latest super-duper high end camera body's.. I know this will help explain what the lens can do when pushed.. But most of us are limited in what we can spend and will try and get the most out of it by buying good lenses to go on our older camera body's rather than new body's with older lenses..So reviews on a7r 2s & 3s and such like would be nice too..
Don’t overestimate what bodies can do. It’s just a hole and a sensor lol. The results for the samples in this test would not be appreciably different on an A7C. file handling with giant pixel counts is a headache too. Fancy bodies, give you more speed and convenience, but they can’t make a better photograph. I haven’t shot this particular lens, but I have the 70 to 180, the original version with no stabilization, and it is in my every gig bag as a part-time pro. My main body is a first generation a nine I bought used, use e Shutter almost all the time so it could ostensibly last forever lol.
Nice review. As a landscape photographer I've been using my Sigma 100-400 EF (Canon lens) with an adapter to my Sony A7R4 (61 megapixels) and in crop mode it delivers 26 megapixels at 600mm equivalent. I just came back from a trip to Iceland, using this combination both to photograph an erupting volcano and also puffins. It all worked as a sharm and for puffins I got so many razor sharpo images even without cropping. The auto-focus however is slow and misses a lot so bird-in-flight photography became quiete frustrating. This focal length is ideal to use one lens for more shots that currently, limiting the chance of dust on the sensor. Fast auto-focus will make it versatile as well. This size and weight will probably make it into my photobag where I'll have 2nd thoughts for a 150-600 lens
The Sigma 60-600 is similar, but with a longer zoom range, and both heavier and costlier!
The sigma 60-600 was too big for me to carry around comfortably
I saw that lens and fall in love. Want more lenses like this.
Tamron is just knocking it out of the park lately with this wide variety of quality zooms. Mirrorless is definitely better for zooms of this style.
35-150 and the 150-500 Tamron have me covered. so I don't need one. the 35-150 is my favorite lens I lOVE it! I might have been interested if I didn't have what I have...
How does this lens compare with the Sony FE 100-400 GMaster?
Do you think this would be suitable for wildlife shooting if used on a APSC?
Yes, very much so! But, you must understand that the depth of field will not change, it will simply enlarge the frame. However, I don't see anything wrong with this. Just my opinion...
Would you recommend this lens for the canon r7. To replace the SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD?
Great video again!!!! When we can see those drumming videos, where you can film you friend?
Great review. I already own a Sony 24-105 GM lens, so a better choice for me is probably the Sony 100-400 GM. I'd have my entire range of photography in two lenses. What do you think?
Sony is twice as expensive as Tamron. Sony can do also 30fps on A1.
I wonder how IQ compared.
By the way: it doesn’t matter to have 24-105 and 50-400. Zooms focal lengths could overlap.
Would prefer this for my Fuji instead of the announced 150-500 ….😅
I am waiting for the prime focal length Lenses 300mm 4.0, 400mm 4.5 and 500mm 5.6 !
Man why nobody bothers to make em indeed? Aren't we stuffed with a ton of repetitive zooms? Bring us cheap and light weight tele primes! ISO needs 400mm f5.6 lens which is around 700-800g or even a 200mm f2.8 with less weight.
2:30 "The Bigma" 😂
Phenomenal ranges of Sigma 50-500 and Sigma 60-600 are not touched. And when I need compact telephoto, I have 55-300 anyway.
LOL, back in the day, 10-15 yrs ago, that was the birding lens that I aspired too. A real man's lens. What a beast!
Still got mine. One of the best DSLR lenses for most situation's.
Tuned in for the Jordan running AF test, left bitterly disappointed... 😢😂
2022 best lenses should probably go to every e mount lenses reased this year.
The sony 16-35 F4 is amazingly compact and lightweight but offers superb image quality with minimum focus breathing
The 15mm 1.4, 11mm 1.8 and the 10-20 F4 are all superb ultra wide angle lenses for aps-c line up (only if they can release a proper aps-c camera that doesn't use the fossilized 24mp sensor)
The 24-70 g master showed that it justifies the expensive price compared to the third party versions
Viltrox 13mm F1.4 is a perfect alternative for people who think that the 15mm F1.4 G lens isn't wide enough
Tokina 11-18 is a great alternative to the 10-20 and Tamron 11-20
The sigma 20mm and 24mm are great cheaper alternatives to the 20mm F1.8 and 24mm F1.4
The signa 16-28 is excellent alternative to the tamron 17-28 and the new 16-35 F4 PZ
Samyang's 2nd gen 35mm, 85mm are the best valued 1.4 primes and the 135mm 1.8 is the cheapest of it's kind while taking superb images
The only lens that sucks is the Meike 85 F1.8 with the most chromatic aberration I've seen for the past 10 years.
Hi Chris. Do you know what the minimum focussing distance is zoomed out at the 400mm length? Thanks.
MOD at 400mm is 59 inches / 1.5m, good sir.
Love your content, long time follower. Thank you for everything that you do. Question though, what's up with using Noct to measure weight? Why not just grams. Noct seems to mean several completely different things. It's kind of confusing. Maybe it's just me.... Thanks again.
They should make a 20-50/4,5, then my set up would be complete
Interesting background at 2:00
Now this lens is coming to Z mount it’s competing against the 28-400. On balance I think I’d prefer to have this and a wide prime like the viltrox 20mm
I'm just worried about aperture, because I want to use telephoto lens for night/indoor event as well.
Why don't you guys test AF tracking and hit rate?
Looking forward to Version II as then Nikon will rebadge the old one and sell it for more than its successor 😅 #Ztrategy
Great video thank you for this, what's your opinion on it for using it for video where I need to film myself and then wildlife at the same time?
Why don't reviewers talk about the Sony 100-400 GM with the 1.4x TC? I know it's expensive glass but it seems like it would have incredible versatility. Especially given that you can get a 98-280mm f4 from a 70-200 f2.8 GM as well.
You have to understand that this is a new product, so reviews are coming for it to show people the lens capabilities and its alternatives before buying it. That does not mean the Sony 100-400 were not reviewed when it came out.
Why people do not talk about it in this review : why do they not talk about the sigma 100-400 as well ? They just picked the better options for focal length since all those lenses are sharp. And in this video they talk about wildlife. IMHO 400 is not enough telephoto for wildlife
Anyway the 100-400 is expensive! Since covid-19 and the war in Ukraine things are getting more expensive in other countries than US, plus the shipping and tax we have to pay (I'm one of them).
I also think that keeping the money for travelling is better if the image result will be the same and with weather sealing in the end.
I own the sigma 100-400 and this is one of my sharpest lenses. Plus it has very good OS. For the price you pay, you can get similar results paying less. The GM has better AF though, and so does the Tamron and Sigma with Sony newer bodies even if less better.
Because it's sharper to crop.
The dirt-cheap Sigma 100-400 C works great with a 1.4 TC, so a worthy competitor. It is slightly slow when focusing, and isn't as dust-resistant as I would have liked, but other than that I have no issues at all!
@@ErikssonTord_2 the DSLR version of the contemporary (the mirrorless does not have a compatible teleconverter due to Sony's block on third party converters) is nowhere near the same class as the new 50-400. It's quite literally not a fair comparison in anything other than the zoom range.
@@ErikssonTord_2 given the differences in design, I don't think I'd use any lens not designed for mirrorless. I just think that it loses out on many of the benefits of the system. I also didn't come into mirrorless with any lenses since my previous DSLR was APS-C.
I just realized how much you sound like Bob Odenkirk
Nixe video.
This lens is definitely more comparable to Sony 70-400mm G ssm than the Bigma 50-500mm HSM.
Sony should have had repeated the 70-400mm format on E-mount instead of going to 100mm at the wide end anyway...
I am glad Nikon and Sony have these lenses available for their mount. Great focal length. Even more so on crop sensor.
For now there is no news about a Z mount release of this lens as far as I know
Most super zoom lenses have bad sharpness, this is really impressive! Wish they would come out for RF mount.
Tamron old EF 35-150mm with RF 100-400 is a good alternative
@@zegzbrutal Nice joke! The combo costs even more and even not on par in quality. And well you're killing the benefit of having one to rule them all anyway!
@@shahabh2108 I wouldn't start this 'joke' if there isn't another pointless RF slander from "/ad in a E mount lens review video.
And depends on where you live, both RF 100-400 and Tamron EF 35-150 cost 400USD equivalent in HJ. Both lens together is still cheaper than Tamron 50-400.
I have sony a6400 so its cropped to 75 - 600? and what type of filter I should use to protect my lens
This would be very welcome on x mount.
The purple flowers were completely irritating in the background... an issue of the GH6?
Great Video looks like a versatile travel option
Wow, you sometimes sound like a true street photographer - meaning you don't usually use big telephotos and don't really know use cases for such a lens. 😉
First, this is actually amazingly lightweight. Competitors ("Bigmas" 50-500mm or 60-600mm) are about a kilogram heavier. The Sony 200-600 you'd consider for wildlife photography is almost twice as heavy, yet still doesn't get any wider than f/6.3.
Second, I can think of a few situations for which "normal-to-supetelephoto" is an absolute must-have, worth any compromises you'd have to make: group wildlife and airshow photography. When you have deers spread across a field, you just NEED to be able to get down to 50mm to shoot the whole herd. Same when the Blue Angels suddenly break away from each other, or when a water bomber drops its load. You can always crop (especially using an α7R or α1), but you can't get past that "hey, 150mm is just too long" when the 787 flies by right after F/A-18s, or when the buck tries to get closer to the doe, and you want the whole lot in the picture… 😅
As those are common subjects for me, I wouldn't trade my 50-500mm for a 150-anything, even to save me $800 and 1kg. I actually started considering switching to Sony right after Tamron announced the 50-400mm, and it's no coincidence.
Third, the f/6.3 aperture is actually quite common for 400mm+ lenses, and the recent trend even slips toward f/7 or even f/8. So it's actually a nice surprise Tamron managed to keep it. The only f/5.6-or-faster lenses past 400mm are WAY more expansive (twice the price for the Sony and Nikon 100-400s, which are just f/5.6, five times the price for 200-400mm f/4, despite their awfully long "wide-angle" position…) So I'd argue that the new Tamron is rather fast for its price and range.
Otherwise, thanks a lot for the interesting feedback about handling, focusing and sharpness. You did a good job selling it: now I can't wait to put my hands on this one and an α7R IV, to try them in my woods, where it's gonna be mating season for roe deers very soon. 😉
What’s a Noct?
Something Canadian?
How is the anti-flare coating? Any major issues with ghosting?
Nikon is working with Tamron, maybe we will see it rebranded for zed mount
Thanks for sharing another wonderful video like always 👍👌🙏
tamron 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 di ii vc hld or 50-400mm F4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD ?
almost a direct analogue of the Olympus 12-200. impressive range, but if only it could go wider. also 1:57 tfw your local theatres will never have a big gay anime night showing
Except the Olympus delivers the same performance as a full frame 24-400mm f/7-13. It's way, way worse a lens.
Tamron 20-40mm f2.8 review coming soon?
Is it a good idea to use it with a 6700 for wildlife?
Would it focus fast enough for high school or college football?
Thanks!
I guess it's meant to be used as a walk around, but for Telephoto, why don't we just use the 150-500mm from Tamron? Then if you pair that up with 35-150mm, you cover a better range with better results.
Mainly because the 150-500 is nearly 1.5lbs heavier. The 50-400 replaced my 150-500 in my bag almost exclusively for this reason... That and the Lens Utility programmability. I prefer the 50-400's ability to override the by-wire focusing motor. Setting my personal preference for a 180° rack from MOD to infinity lends a consistency that is hard to express. I love the 150-500 and it will continue to be my go-to for serious wildlife work but the 50-400 is simply more useful for day to day.
1:53 was it really a big gay anime night or just a standard gay anime night? Couldn't make it to sep 2.
Maybe you'll get your answer when the sample gallery goes online.
I am really interested into this lens but I wouls still buy some prime to complement this because it gets dark fast especially during winter. I tried to film at f4.5 in the evening with my 20mmg and i can say it is dark
All in all sony really has unique spectre of wonderful lenses
Ehm......"It got 67 filter size, I like that" Why? I would say that 82 and 72 are better
Now you have a good paper weight for your desk.
I've got a bone to pick.As an old guy, enthusiast, I'm in the market to replace my Sony 70-350mm. Yeah, 600mm would be nice, but for me the size/weight trade off is a no deal. What I find interesting is that in every review I watch , for lenses in this category, there is always this same criticism. Slow f6.3 aperture at the long end, higher ISO, yada yada yada.. Guess what. The only lens that I could find even similar, with an aperture faster than f6.3 is the Sony 100-400 GM which is f5.6. Not a huge difference, I think, particularly at 2x the price, no 50mm at the wide end, 200gm heavier, and much inferior close up capabilities. It's not just this lens that gets that knock, but every other lens in the class. So, I'm waiting for a reviewer to suggest a super telephoto with same size, same reach, and similar cost, as a faster option. Still waiting a year later.😉
1:53 "BIG GAY ANIME NIGHT SEP 2" LMAO WHAT
I see you guys were in town for the Big Gay Anime Night
Nice! One lens to rule them all
18 300 for apsc, 50 400 for ff. not bad not bad at all!
Meh. You failed to mention the updated “bigma”, 60-600mm sport which is also weather sealed and adaptable to mirrorleas and has the same f4.5 to f6.3 aperture. I have the 50-500 and would take 200mm more on the long end and give away 10mm at the wide end any day. The Tamron seems pretty underwhelming if you ask me.
The AF performance difference alone makes the Tamron a better option. As does the better stabilization. It's also far more versatile for video purposes thanks to its extensive programmability. Then there's the massive weight difference of nearly 3.5lbs. Also: if the MTF charts hold true, the Tamron is higher resolution throughout the range. Lastly: it's mirrorless native. 60-600 is definitely useful if one needs the range but the 50-400 wins on nearly every other metric.
Looking at a fairly random option (Jessops here in the UK) the Bigma retails for £1899 and that's without any adapters. The Tamron is up for £1249. That plus the weight difference (2.7 kg! for the Bigma vs 1.1 kg for the Tamron) means that to all intents and purposes, these two lenses are not remotely aimed at the same audience.
Good review. You keep it interesting and fun as always.
I already have the Sigma 100-400 (cheap, good stabilization and super sharp). But as you mentioned the 600 mm is good for wildlife. And not only wildlife but landscape/seascape as well, so I'm thinking about getting the sigma 150-600 which seems to be faster and have better AF than the 100-400 version.
Poor Canon anyway
The Sigma 150-600 S is an outstanding lens, with amazingly fast focus and very little to worry about. Very durable, dust-proof (my copy has been that since day one, which is not true for my Sigma 100-400 C!). Unless you have a really beefy camera, you might want to exchange the tripod mount, or use a rail to be able to balance it on your gimbal. The only issue with this lens is its weight, and that the C.G. (Center of Gravity) moves a lot when you zoom in/out.
The Sigma 60-600 S is slightly lighter, and the C.G. doesn't move about as much! But costs a couple of thousands more!
Was very disappointed with the sigma and went on to the 200-600 and also have the tamron 150-500 which is an excellent lens though a bit dark at the wide end. The sigma I found slow and cumbersome to use and not well balanced.
waiting for tamron 150-500 for fujifilm
Are you guys gonna replace the elizabeth bill in your sharpness board haha
how does it compare to the sony GM 100-400mm?
GM's AF is much faster, and if I remember rightly it has the breathing compensation. Which all Tamrons won't have
@@zegzbrutal GM's AF is not "much faster." They are in fact highly comparable in this regard. As is the resolution performance from front to back where the Tamron actually has the edge at the wide end and the GM has the edge at the 400mm marker, but only noticeable zoomed at 200% in post production. The GM is 10oz heavier due to its construction. The major advantages offered by the GM are the ability to use teleconverters (Sony blocks third party from doing so) and the ability to support higher than 15/20fps burst rates on the sports bodies (Sony also blocks third party lenses from supporting 30fps). The Tamron is more programmable for video including iris control and linear MF performance, breathes less naturally than the GM, and has the macro capability. The GM may be worth double the price for some but the Tamron is uniquely suited to compete head to head. Also: Sony owns a percentage of Tamron. Tamron's lenses are allowed full lens compensation protocols on Sony bodies. The partnership goes back a long, long ways.
1:55 "big gay anime night" on the sign in the background
Ah, you can read! Well done.
How dose it compare to the S22 Ultra..which has a wide range and producers excellent images even in low light
"Big Gay Anime Night" lmao
If they make a Z mount I might sell my Nikkor 70-300 VR. But until then...
Super interesting as a casual lens for family snaps and a bit more of you can stand the wallet sent - there are certainly more expensive lenses though
Anyone else see the theatre sign at 1:58 lol
Sigma has since some years a 60-600mm, which is also a heavy beast. But seriously: who wants to carry this the whole day?
The Sigma 60-600 is a 6lb lens. The Tamron 50-400 is 2.6lb. There's absolutely no comparison in weight. This lens is lighter than most 70-200 f/2.8 lenses by nearly half a pound and is 10oz lighter than the Sony 100-400 GM. Carrying it all day is a breeze.
Thanks for a great review video. I might sell my 24-105 mm f4.0 and get this one. Haha...😂
I don’t get it. ???
Big Gay ANIME NIGHT hahahahahahaha 1:58 omg hillarious.
Maybe for product photography? You know there have been uses of telephoto zooms for portraits. 🤣
Hope Z-mount gets that lens too. 😂
Dose it have stabilization?
Why no one talking about that big gay anime night 😢😢 01:58
When did the "noct" become an unit. Kindly stop this nonsense.
When Nikon decided to waste their ressources on making a huge, dumb lens that nobody needs.
Hey canon, you doing wrong
We also need tamron lens
The Tamron 50-400 is for portraits and street photography and filming
Should be excellent for landscape
Don’t buy yet, Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 coming on January 12. Also, Tamron 150-400mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III VC VXD coming soon.
wow, that front without the lensehood is ugly :o
1:53 - I came for the review, but I stay for the BIG GAY ANIME NIGHT SEPT 2 👍
lmao just notice that
So nice of Jordan to take Chris out with him to Big Gay Anime Night!
thank you for being late on posting this video now i just discovered that i lost the big gay anime night in sep 2 1:57 😡😡
1:52-2:02. 😀 (over the shoulder)
What’s playing at the theatre? 🧐 2:00