JonathanChemE

I am mostly into wildlife photography and landscapes but do need to carry around a camera some for my street tourist type stuff, and I do the occasional portrait or group sometimes. My body is a T7i. I have an EFS 10-18 IS STM, a EF 50MM IS F1.8, an EFS 18-135 IS STM, an EF-S 55-250mm F4-5.6 is STM, an EF 70-300 F4-5.6 IS USM and a Kenko TELEPLUS Pro 300 DG 1.4X Teleconverter for Canon EF Mount. What I am thinking is that I could trade everything, except the 10-18 and 50mm in on a used Tamron 18-400 and only be out a couple of hundred dollars and have a much simpler kit. My question is I am giving up some lens performance quality by going to the one lens verses changing out the lenses as needed? I don't need to change lenses often. If I am in a general location I use the 18-135, if I am doing landscapes I switch to the 10-18 sometimes. Usually I a know I am doing wildlife and have one of the long lenses on. Before I make the switch my wife, who is my main critic (in a good sense of the word) wants me to be sure it would be a good move. I have tried to research the lenses but no good side to side comparison between the 70-300 and 18-400. Thanks for your input.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I think that you are on the right track.
Good logic.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I too think you have the right idea. Consider replacing and / or consolidating some of the lens focal lengths.

Definite keeps:

EF-S 10-18
EF 50 f/1.8
EF-S 18-135

The issue in the 70-300/400 range is there are so many overlapping options in the market, and seemingly within your kit bag. Your stated desire for wildlife photography should lead you to selling all the remaining equipment and replacing with a single EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM.

The 100-400L II has been out for a while and is built like a tank. Find one used if new seems too expensive. They've started to appear in the $1500 range used. Use this lens when shooting wildlife or sports, use the others when not.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

I think Paul has the right idea. I would stay away from the 18-400mm lens. Such lenses no nothing well and it seems that you already have better choices.

When traveling for a specific purpose you do not have to take all your lenses just the ones you are likely to use.

uhaas2009

The last time I use t3i i realize that isn’t a body to keep for me. The limits alone on the focus system wasn’t what I wanted. now I got a pro body/ lenses and I updated my knowledge......if I would just shoot landscape the t7 is great but not for real birding and action.....

JonathanChemE

What camera did you get? Are you happy with it? I am looking at the R5 or R6.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Although the R6 is a full-frame camera, it's a step down from the 24MP resolution of your current camera when used with full-frame lenses. Only your EF 50mm will deliver the full 20MP of the R6 sensor. Mounting an EF-S lens and the camera automatically crops to the smaller image circle, yielding a 7.7MP image, quite a step down in pixel resolution.

The change to full-frame needs to account for new lenses too.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

I just bought an 18-400. My initial photos are sharp and clear. I wanted a more portable drive around lens for my 90D and 7d mk2’s. I’ll find out this weekend and post back my results. I have a 100-400L which is excellent but quite heavy and the 18-400 will be a dream to haul around the ranch and take photos of opportunity. I picked it up new for $524 from a Canadian dealer. The 100-400L cost $1500 a year ago on ebay. Mint condition. I worry it will bounce off the seat when I find a hog wallow. Lots of hog wallows in North Texas.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

You will be giving up a lot of image quality, going to the Tamron all-in-one zoom. For what it is, it's good. But that type of lens always compromises to some extent.

You can compare test shots done with the Tamron lens against shots done with an 18-135mm here: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1145&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=809&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

And you can compare the Tamron against an EF 70-300mm lens here: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1145&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0

While the Tamron lens is good for a 20X zoom, it still falls well short of what less extreme zoom lenses can do. You also should expect it to focus more slowly. I haven't used any of the Tamron "HLD" lenses, but that sounds like some form of micro motor focus drive to me. I am fairly certain the Canon USM lenses will out perform it for focus speed. Especially if you have the 70-300mm "II", with the new "Nano USM" focus drive. The Tamron might equal the focus drive of your 18-135mm "STM" lens. According to Canon the newer 18-135mm USM, which also has the new Nano USM drive, is 2X to 4X faster focusing than the STM version of that lens. They are optically identical, though, so don't expect any difference in image quality (both are very good).

The EF-S 55-250mm STM also is a very capable lens. I didn't set up a comparison between it and the Tamron, but you can if you wish at the above site.

The Canon EF 100-400mm lenses someone mentioned above are in a whole different league than the 55-250mm, 70-300mm and the Tamron lens. Especially the 100-400mm II is a superb zoom... very well built and offering some of the best image quality of any telephoto zoom. Yes, it's bigger and heftier (3.5 lb.) But I shoot with one for 6 to 8 hour days sometimes, with only brief breaks. It's far more than you'll want to spend, though... if you're balking at the cost of the Tamron zoom.

Your best bet would be to keep what you've got and start saving your pennies to add a Canon 400mm f/5.6L USM to your kit some day. Look for used, since it's been around for quite a while. It's extremely sharp and fast focusing, as well as moderate size and weight for a 400mm lens. One thing it lacks is image stabilization. So plan on using it with a higher shutter speed... or with a tripod or monopod.

The Canon 300mm f/4L IS USM is another lens that's quite good and moderate size and weight. It's been around even longer than the 400mm, so is easy to find used for some discount. Nice thing about it is that it has IS. It also works very well with a quality 1.4X teleconverter (I can't say about the Kenko you mention... I use the Canon 1.4X II and find it very good). The 300mm f/4 is not quite as sharp as the 400mm or Canon's 100-400 II, but it's very good and a stop faster than either or those lenses (it becomes a 420mm f/5.6 combo when a 1.4X is attached).

I don't know what 50mm lens you have.... Canon has never made one with IS. The current version they offer is a capable, affordable and cap[able little "STM" lens. That lens superseded the earlier "II" version that wasn't as well made and has considerably slower, noisier and less reliable micro motor focus drive.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

Amfoto1 has a knowledgeable reply and analysis, but it sounds like Jonathan chem E is looking for a budget 400 mm lens. I’m not a pro photographer, but I have a doctorate degree and a keen eye and my Tamron lenses perform well enough to make me wonder why I spent so much on my “L” lenses. I’m sure the “L” lenses are better weather proofed;however, I don’t go out and shoot in the rain. Life’s too short to stand out in the rain and shoot pictures. In Texas, a lightning strike might find you.

JonathanChemE

Never mind I misread something.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

Today my 18-400 left me wanting more at 400 mm. Might be my fault and not the lens. Wonderful on macro. My 70-300L did well on my 1dx mk II. Will try again tomorrow with the 100-400L on the 1dx mk II. Maybe I can tune up 90D and the 18-400. Maybe jonathanchemE was right.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

Amfoto 1 was correct. Am sending the 18-400 back. It won’t autofocus at 400 mm, and won’t manual focus at that length either. It will on close objects. Not on distant objects. 100 yds or so. I didn’t need another 300 mm lens. I wanted a lighter 400 mm lens. Great lens from 18-300 mm. Jonathan CHEM E don’t buy it.