Tet68survivor Loc: Pomfret Center CT

Tamron 18-400 the new one

Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA

Some of these superzooms are very good, but I've read that many are a bit soft on the long end. I've also read they do better stopped down a bit and best if you avoid the extreme ends.

I shot with a Sigma 18-250 Macro model for a few years until I sold my crop body, so I also sold the lens. I wish it would work on my full frame! I'm now looking for a similar lens for full frame, and as soon as I decide which direction I'm going, I'll decide -- but I'm leaning toward the Tamron 28-300 model 185D. With its 9-blade aperture and quality construction, it's said to be a very good lens.

Ignore cthahn, an idiot who likes to post dumbass comments to rile people. Superzooms have come a long way. That Sigma I mentioned produced some very good images that often fooled me into thinking I had taken them with my Sony G glass as I scrolled through old photos. It really is quite good. Not really Sony G good, but at a glance it fooled me. Moreover, they say the best camera is the one you have on you. The same could be said for lenses. If you have an ultra-wide mounted and you see some fleeting distant wildlife, good luck changing lenses and shooting it. The versatility a superzoom provides is worth a bit of a sacrifice in IQ, I think, for general photography. You can always change into a suitable prime when you want to get serious about landscapes or whatever.

One more thing: Lenses are often at their worst on the edges and corners of an image. When you use a full frame lens on a crop body, the camera uses only a central portion of the image rendered by the lens, producing much better quality. So the full frame lens you are considering would probably be much sharper in the corners & edges, but it would be the equivalent of a 45mm lens on the wide side -- which isn't very wide.

swandsch

Yes, I saw the pre-release announcement for the Tamron 18-400mm and it also peaked my interest. Sometimes there are just too many choices, but I guess that's what keeps life interesting. Now that I'm retired, my wife and I are spending MORE time watching our grandchildren play sports, etc, so it would be nice to be able to switch from short to long lens without having to carry two cameras or several lens. Thanks for your helpful response.

Tet68survivor Loc: Pomfret Center CT

When I bought my D5200 2years ago, it came with two Nikkor lenses, a 55mm and a 70-300mm. The Tamron 16-300 caught my eye because it covered both lenses and in any situation where you need a fast lens change (especially at night time or in the rain) I didn't want to fumble around! I read the reviews and decided to take a chance, every one's review was different, some liked it some "perfectionists" did not! Of course I would rather have a fixed f2.8 or better lens, but not on my budget, so I went for it! I have not found "softness" at 300, the auto focus worked well whether at 16 or 300, so I am happy. As far as the new 18-400, I am looking at it, and might sell the 16-300 to get it, BUT I also want a 150-600 G2 from Tamron which has very good reviews! My main Photography interests are nature, landscape, astrophotography, and birds/wildlife! I would not be afraid of either lens, I even have the Tamron 2X Teleconverter which every one says sucks, I find it works well although focusing care is needed but still it works! I joined this site to learn and learn I have! I have learned some great technical skills, but I have also learned, some folks are prejudice and
really do not know what they are taking care about! For the major of experts high I am highly thankful! My favorite BIG lens be at the moment is my 800mm Samyang Mirror lens with the 2X Teleconverter for Astro stuff and even though I was told it is junk DO NOT waste your money, wrong it is worth the price. Again OF COURSE I want a fixed f2.8 800mm of bigger lens, of course I do, but not on my paycheck! Hope to all this makes a little sense! Enjoy the hobby, I sure as hell do!

Tet68survivor Loc: Pomfret Center CT

Just an added note, I use my 16-300 against all odds! I even did an indoor Church Sunday School function and by accident I found the 16-300 worked extremely well indoors in the Aperture mode without a flash, out if 850 photos only two were tossed out due to blur! The rest were great! The families bc and Church leaders were happy with my free work! By the way "free" customers complain the most lol

3dees

sorry wrong topic

AK Grandpa Loc: Anchorage, AK

When I travel, I take my Nikon D500, Tamron 18-400, Tokina 11-16, and a travel tripod . . . Pretty much covers everything I need . . .

Tet68survivor Loc: Pomfret Center CT

👍👍👍

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

That’s what I take unless birding. Need to get a wide angle. How do you like the Tokina?

MTG44 Loc: Corryton, Tennessee

I don't know about the lens you mentioned but I have the Sigma 16-300 and love its versatility the sharp results.

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

Sorry asked the wrong person.

swandsch

I purchased the Tamron 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD Lens for Canon EF from B&H Photo and am getting fantastic pictures at all lengths, both indoors and out! The lens is light weight and gives me the range I was looking for. It may not be the lens for world famous photographers but this lens sure does my pics proud, I couldn't be happier. I would recommend this lens to anyone that is looking for an all-in-one lens. My only other lens I carry now, is a macro lens to capture insects on plant leaves etc. BTW as a side note, the folks at B&H were great with their answers and advice regarding my purchase of this lens.

Scotty

AK Grandpa Loc: Anchorage, AK

It's very sharp . . . I've only used it for interiors so far, this coming summer I plan to do some wide landscapes . . . If I were to do over, I'd probably go for the 11-20 instead for a little more range . . .

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

The Canon 28-300 is an L lens and costs around $2000. It's a decent lens. Money spent on Tamron/Sigma and others will leave you feeling regretful. Ditto for a 16-300. Unless your are ok with mediocre performance, reconsider how important it is to have a superzoom.

waegwan Loc: Mae Won Li

I have the Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD but I have it on a FF 6D. For a 7D I'd go with the Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD MACRO. The 16mm will give you about 25mm, some true wide angle capability, a little better than a 28mm on a FF. I use the 28mm quite a bit.