Tamron 18-400 Just NOT Up To Snuff
Dec 11, 2017 22:59:57 #
Oh Dear - - I guess I was just hoping for a Miracle - - that the Tamron 18-400 would replace my Canon 18-200 as my best ever walk around.
It just WASN'T in the cards. Hey - - the Tammy was pretty good at the Long end
But JUST unacceptable at 18mm. AND - these were shot on my Crop sensor Canon 80D - - I'll NOT bother you with the corner comparisons
Follows are Center crops ALL shot at 18mm with the target about 10 feet away
No - - it's NOT a Focus issue - - I focus bracketed the Tamron using AF and Manual and the image included below was the best Tammy could do.
-
To be fair - - the Canon isn't quite as sharp as my Tokina 12-24 f/4.0 Mk-I at 18mm - although pretty dang close, BUT as an all-in-one walk around, the Canon Rules.
My Go-To Lens for planned shoots remains the Tammy 24-70 f/2.8 VC.
Tamron Rules there as there are NO other f/2.8 capable lenses in that zoom range that have VC, IS, VR, whatever
It just WASN'T in the cards. Hey - - the Tammy was pretty good at the Long end
But JUST unacceptable at 18mm. AND - these were shot on my Crop sensor Canon 80D - - I'll NOT bother you with the corner comparisons
Follows are Center crops ALL shot at 18mm with the target about 10 feet away
No - - it's NOT a Focus issue - - I focus bracketed the Tamron using AF and Manual and the image included below was the best Tammy could do.
-
To be fair - - the Canon isn't quite as sharp as my Tokina 12-24 f/4.0 Mk-I at 18mm - although pretty dang close, BUT as an all-in-one walk around, the Canon Rules.
My Go-To Lens for planned shoots remains the Tammy 24-70 f/2.8 VC.
Tamron Rules there as there are NO other f/2.8 capable lenses in that zoom range that have VC, IS, VR, whatever
Dec 12, 2017 00:10:17 #
Yes sir! I just got the new Tamron 24-70 G2 VC f/2.8 a couple of weeks ago, and my testing results are spectacular. I'm absolutely awed by this lens.
Original image from about 5-6 feet away
1st crop
2nd crop
Dec 12, 2017 00:21:46 #
Jakebrake wrote:
Hi Jake ! Semper Fi :)Yes sir! I just got the new Tamron 24-70 G2 VC f/2.8 a couple of weeks ago, and my testing results are spectacular. I'm absolutely awed by this lens.
My Tammy 24-70 is the Mk-1 version, and from the shots you posted, the G2 version looks like a real Keeper !!
But I don't think I could justify the costs involved in a trade-up versus what I already have.
I just wish the Tammy 18-400 had lived up to the hype - -
Dec 12, 2017 08:27:33 #
Merlin1300 wrote:
Hi Jake ! Semper Fi :)
My Tammy 24-70 is the Mk-1 version, and from the shots you posted, the G2 version looks like a real Keeper !!
But I don't think I could justify the costs involved in a trade-up versus what I already have.
I just wish the Tammy 18-400 had lived up to the hype - -
My Tammy 24-70 is the Mk-1 version, and from the shots you posted, the G2 version looks like a real Keeper !!
But I don't think I could justify the costs involved in a trade-up versus what I already have.
I just wish the Tammy 18-400 had lived up to the hype - -
Semper Fi Merlin!
My Tamron 24-70 G2 is scary sharp.
When the Tamron 16-300 was released I was one of the first to have it as a walk about, and was extremely disappointed in the IQ and returned it. I don't know if I just got a bad copy or what, but it simply didn't cut the mustard for me.
Dec 12, 2017 09:00:27 #
Merlin1300 wrote:
Oh Dear - - I guess I was just hoping for a Miracl... (show quote)
I have been using the Tamron 18-400 lens for several months on both a Nikon D7100 and Nikon D5500. I have been basically happy with the lens. I was surprised by the blurry test photo of the Office Depot box at 18mm.
I got out an Office Depot box and took the following photos, on a Nikon D5500. They were taken on a tripod, at f/8, ISO 100, using a self timer. They are straight out of the camera JPEGs. The distance from camera to the box is about 10 feet 9 inches.
The first photo is the view at 18mm. The second photo is a crop of the first. The third photo is zoomed to 145mm to fill the frame.
This is obviously not a scientific test. Opinions on sharpness may vary. This is not the sharpest lens I own, but, for its versatility, I think many people will find it acceptable.
Perhaps you got a bad copy of the lens.
Dec 12, 2017 09:08:42 #
Recently, here in Miami, Tamron had an evening with several photographers to show their line of lenses and for some educational photo talk.
During the presentation I saw several images from the 18-400 and they look excellent to me. There is a possibility your lens needs calibration and if it is new under warranty I just would ask for a replacement.
During the presentation I saw several images from the 18-400 and they look excellent to me. There is a possibility your lens needs calibration and if it is new under warranty I just would ask for a replacement.
Dec 12, 2017 09:19:32 #
Dec 12, 2017 11:17:35 #
I received my 18-400 Tamron (Canon mount -- finally) yesterday and was only able to take four shots (7D Mk II) and was not all that impressed either. After thinking about it all night, I remembered this DPReview article: https://www.dpreview.com/news/6911492360/tamron-announces-tap-in-console-to-customize-lens-af-firmware-and-more. Going to the Tamron TAP-in page (http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/lineup/tapin/), I find that the 18-400 is a compatible lens... so that may be something I will look into after some other trouble shooting.
Dec 12, 2017 20:09:43 #
deanfl wrote:
Bad Copy - - entirely possible. But the first thing I did was update the lens firmware with the TAP-IN, then shoot a couple of test shots outdoors.I have been using the Tamron 18-400 lens for several months on both a Nikon D7100 and Nikon D5500. I have been basically happy with the lens.
I was surprised by the blurry test photo of the Office Depot box at 18mm. The first photo is the view at 18mm. The second photo is a crop of the first. Perhaps you got a bad copy of the lens.
I was surprised by the blurry test photo of the Office Depot box at 18mm. The first photo is the view at 18mm. The second photo is a crop of the first. Perhaps you got a bad copy of the lens.
The 18mm outdoor crops looked fuzzy - - so I tried again under more controlled circumstances indoors with the Box.
Thinking there might be a back or front focus issue, I tried manual focus + or - a little. Autofocus gave the best result (the shot posted) - which was NOT acceptable.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
If the QC on a lens Mfg process is so hit and miss that I get a bad copy - I'll simply NOT waste my time HOPING the second or third try lives up to the promise.
Had MY lens performed as well on my 80D as yours did at 18mm on your Nikon, I would have been a happy camper and kept the lens.
Unless Tamron reads this column and sends me a lens THEY are CONFIDENT will perform as advertised (ALONG with the TAP-IN module)
I'll be more than happy to check it out, and if it is as advertised, will send them a check for $649 (no tax, no shipping - which was the deal I had from a major authorized dealer)
Otherwise - I'll just live with the long-range telephoto shots I get from my Fuji S1
Dec 12, 2017 20:16:07 #
camerapapi wrote:
At a public Demo - it's unlikely you'll see results from, or be able to test shoot, ANY lenses that haven't been extensively tested by the company.Recently, here in Miami, Tamron had an evening with several photographers to show their line of lenses and for some educational photo talk.
During the presentation I saw several images from the 18-400 and they look excellent to me. There is a possibility your lens needs calibration and if it is new under warranty I just would ask for a replacement.
During the presentation I saw several images from the 18-400 and they look excellent to me. There is a possibility your lens needs calibration and if it is new under warranty I just would ask for a replacement.
Sure - - I might have gotten a bad copy - - BUT - as I spent more than a couple of hours trying to figure out why the lens was fuzzy at 18mm
And my Time has considerable value (according to my employer) - - I'm just NOT anxious to roll the dice again.
Tamron HAD their shot with this lens - - and came up empty. And while I LOVE the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC, as far as the 18-400 goes, I won't be fooled again.
Dec 12, 2017 20:20:18 #
RonBoyd wrote:
See the above. The first thing I did with this lens was connect to the TAP-IN module and update the firmware. THEN I shot the images.I received my 18-400 Tamron (Canon mount -- finally) yesterday and was only able to take four shots (7D Mk II) and was not all that impressed either.
I find that the 18-400 is a compatible lens... so that may be something I will look into after some other trouble shooting.
I find that the 18-400 is a compatible lens... so that may be something I will look into after some other trouble shooting.
The TapIn connection will allow you to adjust the micro-focus at 5 distances. But front/back focus issues did NOT correct the problem I had.
Don't waste too much time making your decision. The BEST vendors I know only give you 30 days to initiate an RMA.
Mine went back the day after I received & tested it.
Dec 13, 2017 15:33:25 #
RonBoyd wrote:
I received my 18-400 Tamron (Canon mount -- finally) yesterday and was only able to take four shots (7D Mk II) and was not all that impressed either.
I change my mind. Yesterday, I went to the "Wild Animal Sanctuary" to take few shots. Before I left, I put a polarizing filter on the lens... and then promptly forgot I did that. <blush> All of the shots are hand-held -- which was a problem at great distance because I wasn't all that steady and the auto focus kept searching. Oh! and I set the camera to Program and let the camera decide exposure. (They were all shot as RAW files.). These are a couple results:
The lions are about 100 yards away -- the first image is 177mm and the other two are at 400mm. The male image is cropped.
The tiger is even further away -- maybe half again as far -- and it is cropped substantially. Shot at 400mm. This is out-of-focus primarily because I was unable to hold the camera steady and the AF never stopped searching.
The wolf is quite close maybe 40 feet and at 400mm not cropped.
The airplane was the shocker. It was several miles away and was just a white blob to the naked eye. It is at 400mm and cropped substantially.
All of images were processed only with Lightroom's new "Auto" Tone feature.
All things considered, I have no complaints.
Dec 13, 2017 17:25:59 #
18-400 is a 22X lens; a few rough spots shouldn't be surprising. At one time I had their 18-270 lens, but I stopped using it because it had more compromises than I was comfortable with.
Dec 13, 2017 21:41:07 #
RonBoyd wrote:
Hi - - Ron: the lens I received was not too bad when zoomed to 100mm or more, but If I'd wanted a 100-400, or even a 150-600, THAT'S what I would have bought.I change my mind. The lions are about 100 yards away -- the first image is 177mm and the other two are at 400mm. The male image is cropped.
The tiger is even further away -- maybe half again as far -- and it is cropped substantially. Shot at 400mm. All things considered, I have no complaints.
The tiger is even further away -- maybe half again as far -- and it is cropped substantially. Shot at 400mm. All things considered, I have no complaints.
What I was looking for was an all-around replacement for my Canon 18-200 with a bit more reach. I thought maybe the Tamron 18-400 would do that.
Turns out the copy I received failed miserably at the wide end.
rehess wrote:
A "Few" rough spots MIGHT have been OK, but a Rough Spot from 18mm to about 100mm is TOTALLY surprising. Lens went back to possibly find a more tolerant home.18-400 is a 22X lens; a few rough spots shouldn't be surprising. At one time I had their 18-270 lens, but I stopped using it because it had more compromises than I was comfortable with.
Dec 14, 2017 09:51:17 #
Merlin1300 wrote:
A "Few" rough spots MIGHT have been OK, but a Rough Spot from 18mm to about 100mm is TOTALLY surprising. Lens went back to possibly find a more tolerant home.
I posted the 400mm shots because that was the zoom I was most concerned about. In fact, almost all of the shots that day were at the range. I did take two other shots that were separate from all the others. Both are handheld (which is the way the lens will be used) and are RAW converted to JPG to post here. Both are minimally processed as not being worthy of time spent for such foolishness. Oh! and the camera is set to program because that will be the most common setting while using this lens.
The first is a Sunrise that is processed only as a Lightroom 3-image HDR merge -- otherwise, straight out of camera. It is at 18 mm, ISO 320, 1/125 sec at f/3.5.
The second is processed with LR's Auto Tone only -- and White Balance corrected. It is at 64 mm, 1/125 sec at f/5.0, ISO 4000. It is very noisy because the room was fairly dark and no flash. The focus however seems acceptable to me.
So, as a "Walk-around" lens, I believe I will be happy with it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.