Tamron 100-400

Messages
96
Name
Dean
Edit My Images
No
does anyone have the new tamron 100-400 and using it with canon 7d mk ii if so how do you find the lens , thanks
 
does anyone have the new tamron 100-400 and using it with canon 7d mk ii if so how do you find the lens , thanks

I have one and I'm using it with an 80D.
For the price it's a very sharp lens and I'm more than happy with it.
Here's an example shot.

 
Last edited:
I'm interested in this lens too with the 7Dmk2. Does anyone know how the AF would compare to a Canon 100-400 or even 400mm f5.6?
 
I'm interested in this lens too with the 7Dmk2. Does anyone know how the AF would compare to a Canon 100-400 or even 400mm f5.6?

I owned a Canon 100-400 in 2011 and from what I can remember, the Tamrons AF is on par with it.
The Tamron gets some very good reviews, have a google around, you'll soon fine them.
I was considering getting another Canon 100-400 but I decided that the Tamron being newer should hopefully be on par with the Canon mk1 version and as I got it new for under £500 new, it was a no brainer.
The Tripod ring is a rip off though at £100 but hand held it is fine for me.
 
I used one a few weeks ago on the RAF 100 Year anniversary. In the relatively short time i used it (Another Engineer brought it to site) i found it to be a fantastic lens, sharp and very quick. Considering one as an all round zoom for my Nikon. HTH :)
 
I'm tempted by that price, but I keep being drawn to the Canon 400mm and I notice e-infintiy don't have that in stock at the moment.
 
I'm tempted by that price, but I keep being drawn to the Canon 400mm and I notice e-infintiy don't have that in stock at the moment.

You mean the Canon 400mm prime?
They are showing as in stock.
 
Last edited:
Are they? My mistake. I'll have another look. Thank you ;)

Edit. Nope, I'm still getting it showing out of stock at £759 :confused:
 
Last edited:
Are they? My mistake. I'll have another look. Thank you ;)

Edit. Nope, I'm still getting it showing out of stock at £759 :confused:

I was referring to the Tamron 100-400
 
Really like the look of this lens too. I'm one of those people that rarely shoots anything that needs really long focal lengths but I would like to have the option sometimes. Could not justify spending big on a lens like this but under £500 seems pretty decent VFM. Have considered some of the longer 150-600mm options but the sheer size of those means I'd probably never have it with me when I want it. But it bugs the hell out of me that a tripod mount is another £110 for this Tamron! It doesn't half distort the overall price! Am I right in saying that there are still no cheapo third party versions?
 
But it bugs the hell out of me that a tripod mount is another £110 for this Tamron! It doesn't half distort the overall price! Am I right in saying that there are still no cheapo third party versions?

As far as I know there isnt a third party tripod mount. However, I don't find it a problem using it hand held. I'm also looking at buying a Tamron 150-600 G2 and that weighs in at nigh on 2kg so I'll be using a tripod with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LC2
As far as I know there isnt a third party tripod mount. However, I don't find it a problem using it hand held. I'm also looking at buying a Tamron 150-600 G2 and that weighs in at nigh on 2kg so I'll be using a tripod with it.

I'd like the tripod option for landscapes and maybe the odd moon in landscape type shot.
 
I'd like the tripod option for landscapes and maybe the odd moon in landscape type shot.

I know there was a recent thread discussing landscapes and focal lengths but the 100-400 isn't suitable for landscapes for me. I prefer either the Canon 10-18 and 18-135 for those. I tend to use the 100-400 on bright days so depending on the light you could get away using it hand held for landscapes.
 
I know there was a recent thread discussing landscapes and focal lengths but the 100-400 isn't suitable for landscapes for me. I prefer either the Canon 10-18 and 18-135 for those. I tend to use the 100-400 on bright days so depending on the light you could get away using it hand held for landscapes.

When you say 'not suitable', is that just because you don't favour such a long lens for Landscapes or is there some reason why the Tamron itself isn't cut out for it?
 
When you say 'not suitable', is that just because you don't favour such a long lens for Landscapes or is there some reason why the Tamron itself isn't cut out for it?

It's the focal length, 100mm is too long and not wide enough for me but that's just my personal taste.
The 100-400 in itself is very sharp and the AF is quick as well.
 
I know there was a recent thread discussing landscapes and focal lengths but the 100-400 isn't suitable for landscapes for me. I prefer either the Canon 10-18 and 18-135 for those. I tend to use the 100-400 on bright days so depending on the light you could get away using it hand held for landscapes.

This is an example of the type of thing I'd like to play around more with. This one was at 500mm and I missed focus a bit but it's an example of the sort of thing I'd like to do more of. A 600mm lens would be even better for this but I don't think I'd get so much use out of it for other things.

Supermoon at South Shields.jpg by G.A.D, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
This is an example of the type of thing I'd like to play around more with. This one was at 500mm and I missed focus a bit but it's an example of the sort of thing I'd like to do more of.

You must ha e been gutted about the focus as it’s otherwise a great shot with lovely texture to the colours.
 
There are now chinese copies on ebay for £33

I got one from Amazon.com for £33 inc shipping, taxes etc.
I'd forgotten about this thread :)
 
Back
Top