Is the Tamron 18-400mm a GOOD Upgrade from my Nikon 18-200 Lens? 

Don't know why people can't compare lens at similar prices, the 18-400 costs less than half the price of the 200-500, that is like comparing a ford to a Cadillac, of course we all would love to have the more expensive car, but because of funds we end up with the Ford. I see this same thing on one review after another, people comparing lower price lens to much more expensive lens and it makes absolutely no sense. Don't like the 18-400, than compare it to something in the same price range, now that would be helpful.

The Tamron 24-70, 70-200 and 90 Macro are great lenses. The 90 Macro is great as a portrait lens too.

I shoot with the 18-400. I had to dial in a little autofocus correction on my D7200. My overall opinion is it is very good at what it was designed to do. Is it as sharp as a 400mm prime? Nope. However, it gives very respectable results. I honestly think if you gave your camera to a friend with this lens, and 2 of your favorite lenses and had them shoot photos and then lay the photos out before you it would be quite difficult to find the ones taken with this lens.

Hello, can you suggest which is better for the bird photography? Tamron 150-600g2 or the Nikon 200-500 f5.6e. I have a great Nikon d7200 body with me but for bird photography, I want more reach . 2hich one will give me better?

Never used this lens but heard good things about it, if you want one lens with amazing reach for DX body then I would recommend the Tamron 18-400mm

Hello : Bonjour , I have a Nikon D7500 , i think to replace the Nikkor 18-300 3.5 -5.6 by this lens it's for sport pictures ...

hello sir I like your all the videos because you provide very good information to the all beginners and I am also beginner. so my question is to you that I have Nikon d7200 with 18 to 140 mm lenses but now I am looking for budget zoom lens like 70 to 300 mm (or any other zoom lens with Fast focus) and searched on few websites like DP preview so mostly people are saying it is better that I should go for 70 to 300 mm FX lens but I have DX body so is it compatible with dx body ? and will I get the good results what do you prefer that I should go for DX lens on DX body or I should go for FX lens on DX body. I need fast Focus. Bcz I am looking such zoom lens for sport nd wildlife photography.

The Nikon 70-300 with VR is a great lens which is highly rated and will give an equivalent max focal length of 450mm on a crop sensor, not to mention much lighter in weight and size. You can carry it around all day and wouldn’t be overburdened, no need for tripod! I love this lens! Upgraded to the newest version and is amazingly sharp, silent focusing and lighter.

At the moment I'm using the D5300, though I hope to upgrade to the D850, or equivalent, at some point. I have been using the NIKKOR AF-S 200-500mm with the AF-S tele-converter,, TC-14E III for long work. This converter only fits my 200-500mm. Normally the 18-200mm is my carry around, but for an added reach the 70-300mm for there for light carry. (The addition of the tele-converter does not add much more weight to the 200-500mm.) I use this combo for nature shots and changing the converter is fast and easy enough if the light levels drop. With this 200-500mm lense, a mono/tripod is a must for me, though I have successfully shot handheld.(More stuff to carry.) I guess I am always looking to expand my inventory with a more compact grouping, thus the interest in the 18-300 and 18-400mm lense familes with all present lenses being NIKON family. So much to learn.:)

I just got the Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6 AF-P FX version and I mostly take pictures of wildlife. I am considering returning it and getting the sigma 100-400 but haven't been able to find any good comparisons between these two. Another thing I considered was getting the sigma 150-600, but I really would like to have a lens that is easier to hike with. Any opinion on the sigma 100-400 vs the FX AF-P 70-300?

200-500 is a class lens any given day...but I don't think that he is looking for that range...as you mentioned in the first part, he wants to keep one lens and go out shooting...if that is the case, there is nothing in the market that compares with Tamron 18-400

I've heard several people praise the Nikon 200-500. Wish I could afford one myself and wish I could go on shoots where I'd need to use it!

I got the Nikon DX 18-200 VR II after I broke the Nikon DX 18-105 lens that I bought with a Nikon D7000. The only reason I don’t use the 18-200 as much is that I bought Nikon D500 with the Nikon DX 16-80 “kit” lens. I also bought a Nikon FX 70-300mm AF-S VRG lens with the D7000 that I use as a “wildlife “ lens. If I didn’t have the 70-300 lens, I would consider the Nikon FX 28-300mm as a “walk around “ lens.

Good stuff you are saying there Matt. No lies lol. However the 200-500 is a "save up for lens". and this guys sound like he wants an all round, low budget lens. I personally own the 200-500 and is superb. I recently bought the 18-400 when i was going on a cruise and wanted something I could "possibly" do birding with because my 18-200 is too short, along with taking family photos. I MUST SAY I AM TRULY IMPRESSED WITH THE QUALITY OF THE IMAGES ON THE TAMRON 18-400. Its eye popping for what its worth. Now Be careful.....its a F6.3 lense......but you have to shoot it at F8 if shooting at the 400mm mark to get the quality image that is satisfying. Its an outdoor lens for bright sunlight. I am really happy with it though. I will be selling my 18-200 shortly.

Why make a video for critiquing a lens that you never used? As a result you mention other lenses and do not really evaluate what the video title depicts. I did purchase the Tamron 18-400 and have attached it to a D5500. After several times shooting to get used to the lens I find the quality to be excellent considering I am not using top of the line equipment.

The Nikon 28-300 is a great lens.

R.i.p matt you help me buy my first camera Nikon d5500

Dear Matt I bought a canon m50 with its 15-45 kit lense,but as am a rookie wildlife photographer I need a lense with an extra reach... currently am using a canon 55-250,can you please suggest a budget telephoto lense option for canon m50...plz help By Big fan

if you want to zoom in very far get a bridgecamera,ok a little less bright pictures but you get that with those zoomlenses anyway.i have my canon 77d with my kitlens and de 55-250mm and a 50mm f1.8 for everyday use and i have a lumix fz300 with an optical 600mm zoom at f2,8 for my wildlife,its portable.i wanne see you on a 20 km hike true crosscountry with those huge bazooka lenses.

Had an 18-400, had it threedays sent in back for a replacement. just as bad as the first soft edges, slow focus.and just felt cheap. So now i have saved the money and am expecting my nikon 200-500 on monday. Now ihad a tamron 70-200 2.8 non vc, before having vr or os orvc whatever tbey want to call it. And i loved it..however its gone bythe way of nikon

My dad had the 200-500mm and I used it more than him (before he sold it 😥) on a d7200 body. I could tell it was a very good high quality lens but it's heavy. My guess is the guy is looking for something that covers the wider focal range in addition to having decent zoom and would not be soooooooo heavy. But in the right situation the 200-500mm is a great lens. I was even able to get some fairly decent macro shots out of it, that's how sharp it is.

Matt, I own the the latest Tamron 24-70 70-200 f2.8 lenses and are much improved from there previous generation of lenses. Nikon lenses of the same focal length maybe a little sharper in some cases, but the price difference can save you about $2000 to buy another camera or lens!

Matt brother you miss the point on that one... The Tamron 18-400mm is not only an amazing lens but is as good if not better as the Nikon or Sigma offering of 18-300mm for APSC cameras & not only does it give you an amazing range (20x) between the 2 extreme strings but it is the only one that can focus dow to just under 8 inches @ 400mm give you a very nice macro lens as well as a one lens fits all for street shooting or travel photography & most that have tried it were very impressed & Ken Wheeler (the Angry Photographer) who can be critical of crapy lens said the he would buy this lens as he liked it very much. So you get a 20x zoom lens that nice & sharp with macro capability & that is both of the same size & weight as Nikon's own 18-140mm lens & Tamron VC is excellent providing up to 4 stops of image stabilization. I agree the lens is kinda strange looking extended with that 3 tiers barrels extension but don't let that fool you is is fully weather sealed with Orings at each steps of the extension & the lens is quite resistant to abuse sine the brand new copy that I had just bought fell of my bag coming out of my car & fell face first onto the cobble stone sidewalk & the only damage it suffered was the slightest of mark on the side of the reversible hood on the lens at the time 7 it shattered the UV filter in place so I went inside the camera shop the I was visiting when this happened & ask the owner for a replacement filter & remove the old one with broken glass all over my front element, shook it on to od a garbage can & blow whatever dust & particle left in the filter tread with my Rocket Blower Check the front element with a loupe & having conclude that it was fine & clean I proceed to put on the new filter, mounted the lens on my D7200 & took few shots to check sharpness & to make sure it was fine & it was with just a small mark on the lens hood to show that anything ever happened & I'd have to show you that scar for you to even noticed it. I am Sold ! That lens is awesome & practical sine I can leave the house with just one compact camera body & one lens attached to it carried in a camera & lens holster & know that I'm covered for most situation from wide angle shots (except for the most extreme ) to nice telephoto shot giving me a 600mmm field of view For anything wider I have my Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 & for faster again my Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 but for all other shots this Tamron 18-400mmm f3.5-6.3 is all that I need & designed for my APSC camera & a far cry from my FF Nikon 80-400mm f5.6 D lens with faster & quite focus & weight & size saving. The only this missing is the tripod foot but I alway seem to shoot that lens handheld anyway.

I owned the Nikon 18-200 and I own the Nikon 18-300 and the Tamron 18-400 which I use for travel with my Nikon D500. No super zoom is going to have stellar optical performance but I prefer the Tamron over the two Nikons. The Tamron is sharper than the 18-200 and the 18-300 Nikon lenses and is amazingly compact for its focal range. The VR on the 18-400 is just acceptable and it suffers from significant focus breathing. I just returned from a trip to the Black Hills with just my D500 and the 18-400mm Tamron and this served me well. The Nikon 200-500mm F/5.6 is obviously in a different class for telephoto photography but you didn't ask your viewer what he wanted to use the 100-400 Tamron for and what his budget was. If someone understands the pros and cons of a super zooms they are quite capable of producing stellar images.

I have the Tamron 18-400. Very good walk around. Sharp images. Don’t just go shooting at night.

Rod switched from 10MP D200 to 24MP D7100. 18-200 is ok for upto 12MP or even 16MP, but not higher resolution. There is NO all-in-one zoom that will give satisfactory (sharp) image with 24MP camera - period. Rod mentioned that it is not sharp enough. If Rod wants sharper images, he has to settle with lower zoom range or prime lenses (in the film era there were only primes. Ken Rockwell takes everyday pictures mostly with 35mm f1.8G prime) - or simply reduce size of pictures (medium or small). A reasonable compromise is Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR ($497). Wider aperture, less zoom will be Nikon AF-S DX 16-80mm f/2.8-4E ED VR Lens ($1,067) OR Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM ($449). If you want sharper results, you will leave all-in-one territory and enter semi-pro/pro range.

Having owned a telephoto lens I can't help thinking the 18-400 is a stocking filler. If you buy a 400mm you want reach.. So go for the 200-500 used the weight is there for a reason. If a telephoto is cheaper and lighter it's not a great combo. I love tamron but I'm guessing this is not the best.

I shoot with the Nikon D7500. I have the Tamron 18-400 mm I'm not pleased with its performance at all. The focal range is great but the image quality just isn't very sharp. Everything always seems pixelated or fuzzy. In comparison I shoot a lot with my Nikon Af-p 70-300mm vr lens and it it's image quality is far better. It focuses much faster as well.

The nikon 200-500 is undoubtable a great lens. But it is not a carry around lens. The person who asked the question was looking for a long reach versatile lens..

tamron 18-400 is soft above 200mm, and very soft above 300.

R.I.P. Matt. We all miss you. 😥

Matt you should try the Tamron 10-24mm HLD to recover your faith in the brand

I have it and not in love with it, going to sell it. I also have the Tamron 100 - 400 and its much better. For the price the 100 - 400 is a better deal.

From Tamron maybe a 100-400 or a Sigma 100-400. Like Sigma many of the newer lens from Tamron seem to be a lot better. Maybe the days of cheap junk from these 3rd party makers are gone.