Tamron lens 18 to 400 mm or the 16 to 300 mm, which is better quality?
May 4, 2021 08:45:07 #
May 4, 2021 09:03:10 #
machia
Loc: NJ
Dwiggy wrote:
I have used the 18-400 in many different situations on my Canon 80D & found it unsatisfactory. No very sharp at 300-400 and have considered selling it. It probably needs tuning to my camera....and just haven’t taken the time. I’d be cautious purchasing it.
I’m cautiously optimistic, would you want to sell it?
May 4, 2021 09:51:26 #
Gene51 wrote:
Well, a lot of comments talk about the convenience... (show quote)
I completely agree with you! My idea of a convenience zoom is a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for example instead of the 35mm f/1.8 prime on a DX camera.
May 4, 2021 10:33:38 #
Mr Bill 2011
Loc: southern Indiana
Longshadow wrote:
18-400???
I have been using one on my Canon D70 for a year or so, and I can't recall taking it off since I first put it on. It is a little soft on the long end, but the ability and convenience to go from a 28 mm equiv. to a long telephoto is more than worth a little softness on occasions. It's not often that I use the longest focal length anyway, ~640 mm equiv.
May 4, 2021 10:55:09 #
cony25 wrote:
What do you think of this multipurpose lens? Is it worth it or are they trying to take on too much?
A friend of mine had one and asked me to help him sell it. He was moving from the Canon platform to Fuji. So I took the lens and played with it for a while to see if I like it and also so that I could answer questions from potential buyers. I thought it was extremely cheaply made, very stiff, and soft at 400mm. I tested it at different focal lengths and looked at test images taken with it on my computer. It has about the most CA and other distortions I've ever seen from any lens. I could correct most of the CA in post, but it took me a while. If you take snaps while on holiday then this will probably fit the bill just fine. It's small and light footprint is about the best feature it has along with the very versatile focal range. But those of us that are picky about the quality of our photos, and the feel of a quality lens, this is a hard pass.
May 4, 2021 11:01:28 #
You did not mention what camera are you using at present but if you ask me I would say go with the camera manufacturer lenses. They have been specifically made for their cameras so, to begin with you will not find any incompatibilities between camera and lens.
I am not saying independent lenses are not good but if the focal length or focal lengths in the case of a zoom are made by the manufacturer that would be my first choice.
You should know, if you do not know it already, that when manufacturing zooms lens manufacturers have to make compromises. The longer the focal length the more compromises which could affect optics and resolution. You should know also that zooms made today are far superior to those made only 10 years ago. A majority of zooms today have excellent resolution, especially when working with apertures like f8-f11.
I am not saying independent lenses are not good but if the focal length or focal lengths in the case of a zoom are made by the manufacturer that would be my first choice.
You should know, if you do not know it already, that when manufacturing zooms lens manufacturers have to make compromises. The longer the focal length the more compromises which could affect optics and resolution. You should know also that zooms made today are far superior to those made only 10 years ago. A majority of zooms today have excellent resolution, especially when working with apertures like f8-f11.
May 4, 2021 11:51:07 #
Hamltnblue wrote:
I had an 18-400 on a 7500 body. Great lens. Price is right too.
Equivalent focal length is 27-600.
Excellent for wildlife
Equivalent focal length is 27-600.
Excellent for wildlife
May 4, 2021 12:08:09 #
cony25 wrote:
What do you think of this multipurpose lens? Is it worth it or are they trying to take on too much?
Tamron is poor---not sharp.
May 4, 2021 12:31:06 #
fetzler
Loc: North West PA
Gene51 wrote:
Well, a lot of comments talk about the convenience... (show quote)
I think that I am with Gene. I would not be interested in any of these lenses unless I were to go into an extremely dusty environment where changing lenses would be difficult. Wide range zooms do nothing well. Consider splitting the range over 2-3 zooms.
May 4, 2021 12:37:38 #
billnikon wrote:
It is not about the quality of either lens, it is more about the quality of the photographer.
Only a competent photographer can bring out the quality of most lenses.
Only a competent photographer can bring out the quality of most lenses.
Competent photographers do not choose a lens by polling a busload of photobozos for opinions, so your comment might be correct but, in context, is merely pissing into the wind.
May 4, 2021 12:41:32 #
Gene51 wrote:
Well, a lot of comments talk about the convenience... (show quote)
You can save and paste that summary onto every new version of this thread as such threads recur about twice a week.
May 4, 2021 12:54:00 #
camerapapi wrote:
You did not mention what camera are you using at p... (show quote)
Compromises only happen when there is a competitive target price point. Some of the most expensive zooms on the planet - like these -
https://www.fullcompass.com/prod/215955-canon-6142b001-cn-e-30-300mm-t295-37-l-sp-pl-mount-cinema-zoom-lens?dfw_tracker=36058-215955&gclid=Cj0KCQjw4cOEBhDMARIsAA3XDRhiKg-dhkIMDu8xO0bgrLb7O5PdfA6sfi5ZENVXDR9QE2nqE9cUbT4aAjVwEALw_wcB
are uncompromisingly good and consistent throughout their zoom range. They'd better be for the $45K they cost. So, I think it's best for you to qualify that for low cost consumer grade zooms, yes, of course, compromises are made. Mainly because the target purchaser is not all that discriminating and ok with an average or lower quality lens for the sake of convenience.
I am familiar with at least three other high quality zoom lenses that come to mind that have few if any compromises - at least not when it comes to image quality. The Sigma 300-800mm F5.6, the Nikon 70-200 F2.8 FL, and the Nikon 180-400 F4 zooms. These are, without a doubt, equal to any prime lens in their focal length ranges. I've used them all, so I speak from firsthand experience. None are in the realm of consumer priced lenses.
May 4, 2021 12:54:45 #
User ID wrote:
You can save and paste that summary onto every new version of this thread as such threads recur about twice a week.
May 4, 2021 13:41:13 #
I've had the Tamron 18-400 for a few years, now. Basically my walk around lens. Never had a problem with it. AF was fast, quiet and did not hunt. I did have the 16-300. Had a tendency to creep. Reach on a crop sensor is, about, 640mm vs 480mm.
May 4, 2021 13:43:15 #
Picture Taker
Loc: Michigan Thumb
I had a Canon 18-400 and found it too slow for action. Talked to Tamron rep and he recommended the 28-300. And have it my carry around lens all the time (on my 5DIV), traversed US, Europe and Asia. Do carry a Canon wide angle too.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.