Stevewayne23 Loc: Sacramento, CA

Would it be advised to replace my Canon 70-300 for my Canon 7D Mark II?

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

It depends on what version of the Canon 70-300mm lens you own. If it's the L series glass, I'd advise you hold on to it and use them interchangeably. I've owned both lens and the IQ is better on the Canon. If it's an older version, the non-L version, then I'd heartily endorse your decision to replace it with the Tamron. The wider range opens up a whole new world for framing your photos.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Yes, it's a better lens even at 300mm, based on your lens being the cheap non-IS model.

Stevewayne23 Loc: Sacramento, CA

I don't have the L glass; the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

dleebrick Loc: Indian Land, South Carolina

The Tamron Tailgate guys were in the neighborhood this morning, so I tried out the 16-300 lens this morning on my Canon T1a. I was disappointed in it. Up to about 150-200, its okay, but at max focal length, the chromatic aberration gets pretty bad. I'm keeping my Tamron 70-300 for a while yet.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

:thumbup: f5.6 trumps f6.3 in all light but especially lower light focusing .

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

No, the Tamron lens wouldn't give better image quality than the lens you have now. It also would be slower focusing. And the Canon lens is 1/3 to 2/3 stops faster, depending upon focal length. (If you had the really cheap EF 75-300 non-IS, non-USM, the Tamron would be an improvement.)

You can compare image quality of the two here:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=953&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=358&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

At focal lengths they share, there isn't much difference. But at shorter focal lengths, especially with larger apertures and away from the center of the image, the Tamron's images are nothing to write home about.

One caveat... Even if the lens worked acceptably well now, it's also anyone's guess if the lens will or won't work right on future Canon camera models. Only Canon lenses are pretty much guaranteed to work on Canon cameras (well, only L-series are guaranteed, but in 25 years and 110 million lenses there haven't been any notable compatibility issues even among non-L series). There is no similar "guarantee" with third party lenses (and there have been more than a few Tamron and, especially, Sigma that wouldn't work well).

Canon's USM focus drive will out-perform Tamron's PZD. (Tamron's USD focus drive, on the other hand, offers performance more similar to USM).

Yes, the Tamron would serve as an "all in one" zoom so that you rarely if ever needed to change lenses. Of course, the whole point of a DSLR is the ability to change lenses to adapt the camera for use in different conditions.

If I were you, I'd simply keep the EF 70-300 IS USM and add an EF-S 15-85mm IS USM. That's a fantastic lens and in combo with a 70-300mm would make for a very versatile kit.

If you ever want to upgrade the 70-300mm, I'd recommend looking at the EF 70-200/4L IS USM, perhaps along with a 1.4X teleconverter if you need the extra length.

Depending upon what you shoot... might be nice at times to have something even wider sometimes (EF-S 10-18mm IS STM or EF-S 10-22mm USM.... or something with a larger aperture to be able to blur down backgrounds a bit more (EF-S 17-55mm IS USM, EF 50/1.8 STM, EF 50/1.4 USM, etc.)... or macro (Tamron SP 60/2.0 Macro/Portrait is slow focusing, but nice and compact, with f2 aperture... or Canon EF-S 60/2.8 USM, Tamron 90/2.8 VC USD, Canon 100/2.8 USM Macro.)

EDIT: I just noticed your equipment list in your signature...

"Sigma 18-250, Canon 70-300, Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II, Sigma 24-70 2.8, Tamron 150-600, Canon 50mm 1.8"

Now I REALLY don't see need to add an 18-300mm to the mix!

If it were me I'd:

- Dump the Siggy 18-250 and 24-70...
- Get an EF-S 10-18 IS STM or EF-S 10-22 USM...
- And get an EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM.
- Maybe upgrade 50/1.8 II to new STM version, or f1.4 USM, or Tamron 60/2.0 Macro/Portrait.

If you didn't mind carrying around the 70-200/2.8 IS USM II, you could get a 1.4X to work with it and dump the 70-300, too.

If the 70-200/2.8 IS USM II doesn't end up in your bag regularly due to its size and weight, sell it and replace with an EF 70-200/4 IS USM... which about 2/3 the size/weight, but just as sharp, fast focusing and well made, also works well with 1.4X.