Canon 100-400mm or Tamron 150-600?

mw0dbb

mw0dbb

Messages
185
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all, at present I have the canon but I'm thinking about maybe swapping for the Tamron. Has anyone made a comparison?

John
 
Don't forget the new sigma 150-500 as well.....

Do you mean the old one or new one wrt the 100-400 ?

Have a read of:- DPreview
 
It's the old one, I just want more range.... But I don't want to compromise on quality. I'm abit put off by Sigma, never had much luck with them.

John
 
mw0dbb said:
It's the old one, I just want more range.... But I don't want to compromise on quality. I'm abit put off by Sigma, never had much luck with them.

John
Click to expand...
Wait for the mk 2 to ship and get a good second hand one ?
 
I don't see this as a real comparison, 400 'v' 600 is a big difference.

If as you say you want more range, then it's a no brainier 600 is more than 400.

You should be asking the canon plus extender or the tamron for quality, and if you have the money my bet would be the new 100-400 mkII + extender will be right up there.
 
Last edited:
100-400 mk1 could be quite a big bargain in a couple months time when most shooters upgrade to far superior mk2. I'd still go with mk2, because mk1 practically tops out at 300mm (or simply said 70-300 L is far better lens). The new sigma is 600mm, but it's a super heavy one. The 1.4x TC on Canon may just do the thing when needed.
 
Mine is the mk1, I also have the 1.4x converter but I find the images go soft and the lack of af doesn't help! I'm wondering on the canon 400mm prime but I gather they don't af with the teleconverter! Is anything simple in photography?

John
 
Depends which canon camera body you use. The 1D series bodies plus the 5d MKIII autofocus upto f8 (f5.6 and above centre point only) as an option, you can pick up 1D MKII and 1Ds for not a great deal nowadays, depending on the type of photography you do
 
I'm using a Canon 6d, I'm not spending anymore on camera bodies! Probably cheaper to buy the Tamron.

John
 
There are several threads on this forum regarding both new 150-600 lenses, I think you need to draw your own conclusion regarding your needs whether either of these lenses meet what you want, but being f6.3 at the top focus range, they ain't going to be quick in challenging conditions
 
I just want it for wildlife really. I know even the canon is pretty poor in low light.

John
 
Don't know if you're set on having a zoom, but I use the Canon 400mm f5.6 on a Canon 60d - the IQ and sharpness are amazing. The crop gives me a good reach. With a Kenko 1.4 TC I can use all the focus points apart from the centre one, but you need to shoot during good light for best result. If you want to shoot in lower light you either need to pay big money for the pro lenes or get closer (your never close enough right) and use something like a 70-200 2.8.
 
mw0dbb said:
I just want it for wildlife really. I know even the canon is pretty poor in low light.

John
Click to expand...

90% of my wildlife now gets done on the Tamron 150-600, it is a good price, good quality and light enough to carry about without issues.
Yes it's f5.6-f6.3 but so is the Sigma xxx-500 equivalent that's been used for all sorts of photography, including wildlife, for years.


{Just noticed it's a resurrected thread but comment still applies :) )
 
Last edited:
This video from Tony & Chelsea (great lady but awful name!) Northrup has some helpful and objective comments about these lenses....


Tony Northrup is always objective and unbiassed as he has to buy everthing he reviews.
 
Last edited:
Mike.P said:
Interesting video but most of the shots they were showing at the end were from the 500mm f4 :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

....Yes, that was because their video was also about wildlife tips. I think that there was still plenty of useful information about the 3 zooms.

Like Tony said, it wasn't about scientific IQ testing.
 
TBH I'm not sure that anyone looking for conclusive advice would be helped by it :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top