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
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.
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
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.
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.
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..
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.
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 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.
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...
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
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.
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?
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. 🤑
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.
Thanks Dustin, I really like your reviews! They are very informative for a photographer like me, I plan on getting the Tamron 100/400mm lens this upcoming Presidents day thru B&H! Do you think it is worthwhile getting the tri-pod collar from Tamron-B&H for ($129.00) or finding a less expensive one from somewhere like Amazon? There is a model from Ishoot on Amazon for $60 dollars as well one from Hoage for $50 dollars! How do you think the Tamron 100/400mm lens will perform on the New Nikon D780? Thanks again!😊📸 King of Beasts Inspirational Photography!!
I would recommend that you get the lens itself first and determine if you actually need the tripod collar. It's fairly light, and you may be able to save that money. If you still want one, I would take a flier on one of the third party collars. Amazon is good about returns if you don't like it.
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!
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.
Very nice review of this lens. I own the Tamron 150-600mm G2 and very please with it in combination with 7D Mk II. Eagle photography here in Nova Scotia has become my passion and this should do well. Picking up the G2 of this lens. Thank you. As always very well done.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
If I was a canon user that focus breathing would certainly swing me towards the tamron. For someone who wants to photograph small birds and fill the frame that is a major plus for the tamron I think.
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.
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.
Hello Dustin thanks for the great review, I am currently using a Canon 750D and I am looking for a good lense in this similar price range for aviation. Do you recommend this lense?
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 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.
Dustin! Awesome work as always. I was curious: have you tested the lens with its out of the box VC in video vs. Optimizing for Viewfinder Priority with the TAP-In Console? Japan has said that doing so makes the video VC even better. Curious to know your thoughts.
There may be "give and take" between these lenses, as you say, but Tamron's big "give" seems to be a significant lack of optical performance at wide apertures at focal lengths in the range of 300 to 400 mm. Many others report this deficiency, which is going to be important to landscape/wildlife photographers. I have a much older Sigma 135-400 which has the same limits on its performance, although the new Sigma 100-400 seems to be much better than my old lens and also better than the new Tamron.
If you look at my image quality segment, you will find that (at least with the copy I reviewed), that is not at all true. The optical performance at 400mm is surprisingly good.
I took the plunge and bought this lens. I like it very much. Way lighter than carting the Canon 100-400 MKII around. It's sharp, and the autofocus on my Canon 5DMKII is good. A pleasure to handle. However: I have immediately started getting Error 20 messages on the camera which instructs you to either remove the battery or switch the camera on and off. I missed lots of shots, but it's very haphazard. I could take 30 shots then get an error message, or get one every 10 shots or so. Or go a day without one. I have taken the camera body into Canon to see if the fault lies there. However, before I put on the Tamron lens I had never experienced this issue with any Canon lens.
That typically is something to do with the contacts on the lens. Check to make sure they are not dirty or scratched. But you shouldn’t be getting error messages, so if that doesn’t fix it, call Tamron.
Thanks, Dustin. FYI, the fault turned out to be the camera mirror mechanism, now fixed. The lens works really well. I guess your review of the new Tamron 1.4 converter will apply to this lens too? Very tempted as I am going on a safari, but not sure it's worth the expense. I may be better cropping the original 400mm image?
Not a lens in my sights but a great review. I'm not planning to get rid rid of my Sig 150-600 C but I like to know what is out there and what is working when talking shop with my friends. Great job as always!
Dustin Abbott so true. The 100-400 is probably a better lens for most people. You have to have a passion for mainly birds to really justify the bigger lens. There are times I wish it went further lol.
Without a doubt lol. If you'd like to see my bird images among others check out my website. I don't want to hijack Dustin's post talking about me but you should be able to find if you google me. I'm a hobbiest who loves Birds the most but likes all types of photography.
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
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?
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."
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.
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.
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..??
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.....
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.
Dustin, Given your comments in the final review of the Canon 70-200mm IS L II vs Tamron 70-200mm VC G2 you stated that you would choose the Canon over the Tamron for the type of shooting you do (see your final review starting at about 16:38 min). Yet, you sent the Canon back, it appears, and continue to use the G2 Tamron. Yet, here you sent the Tamron 100-400mm VC back and kept your Canon 100-400 IS L II yet you seemingly found very small differences to justify the Canon's over twice the cost premium. From your numerous videos it also seems you would use the 70-200 focal length far more than the 100-400 Focal length. So if anything I would have thought the brand you would keep would be just the reverse. Why did you not sell the Canon and pocket the savings for other things and keep the Tamron 100-400 VC?
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.
Nice video.. Great info... I’m into wildlife photography, and I was looking at this 150-600 Tamron lens, but I have a Canon M50. What would be you advice, for it? 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.
Good review and decent lens, but you forgot to mention tamron will not allow you to register it for the guarantee or even acknowledge or justify any reason for rejection.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Really is a brilliant lens for the money, and I bought it after watching your excellent review. Unfortunately here in the UK companies are not penalised for poor or non existent guarantees. Will be keeping the lens and please keep your very informative and excellent reviews coming.
Just subscribe cause your review is really good! Thanks for your time and sharing your knowledge. I will give a try to the tamron, can't wait to see the difference between my 70 200 canon 2.8ii and this tamron
Did you notice any hunting or stalling in low light conditions? When I was in my local retailer this lens locked up several time or hunted. I couldn’t tell if it was due to the terrible lighting in the store, some kind of minimum focus distance issue, or if that particular lens was a dud.
I didn't. Was there any risk that minimum focus might have been the issue? That will definitely play havoc with any lens. I also tested the lens on a 5D Mark IV (and 80D), and both cameras have quite good focus systems.
Dustin Abbott at times it totally stoped attempting to focus while planning around the room in AI servo at distances far greater than its MFD. Without condemning that specific lens sample, I’m left questioning if it had something to do with the poor lighting. I was using my 6D Mark II and also tested it on a new 6D Mark II that was in store and experienced the same behavior. When I took the lens outside briefly it behaved normally. Not sure what to make of it.
Thanks for the great review. It seems this lens is indeed better than my sigma 100-400, especially in terms of focusing and tracking. Tamron is doing some great work with their recent releases it seems.The g2 lenses and this alike. Anyway I got my sigma one for cheap, so I am still happy with the purchase. It will really make me upset if tamron include the tripod collar for free though.
Martin Zhang I prefer Sigma lenses too. Despite the review, I ordered a lightly used Sigma 100-400 and I can't wait to test it. I hope Sigma to improve AF and OS performance and release the updated firmware soon.
They aren't throwing in the tripod collar, though I can see there being package deals in the future (like what happens with the Sigma MC-11 or with the USB dock).
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.
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, 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.
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.
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
