Valid alternatives to the 100-400 / 80-400 Canon and Nikon lenses. Sigma or Tamron? Just got through reading an exhaustive piece on the new Tamron. Am interested to know if anyone here...

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Just got through reading an exhaustive piece on the new Tamron. Am interested to know if anyone here has yet gone that route, and if so, are they pleased ... ?

Catnlion Loc: Arizona City, Arizona

I was trying to make the same decision. Between my three choices I read so many reviews and watched so many videos I'm afraid I got decision paralyzed.

SkyKing Loc: Thompson Ridge, NY

...I’m reading that the Sigma is better at 400mm compared with the Tamron...but I would like to see a comparison with the Nikon...I haven’t seen anything yet...

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

SkyKing wrote:

...I’m reading that the Sigma is better at 400mm compared with the Tamron...but I would like to see a comparison with the Nikon...I haven’t seen anything yet...

Maybe, but overall ... I suspect the Tamron is a better lens ....

This guy's review is all aglow, Sky ...

Perhaps, you can find a link there, so you can compare it with the Nikon ....

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-100-400mm-f-4.5-6.3-Di-VC-USD-Lens.aspx

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Catnlion wrote:

I was trying to make the same decision. Between my three choices I read so many reviews and watched so many videos I'm afraid I got decision paralyzed.

Three choices being Canon, Tamron and Sigma ... or, Nikon, Tamron and Sigma, Cat?

This guy's review on the Tamron - is pretty elaborate, and there may be links in it, to help you zero in ....

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-100-400mm-f-4.5-6.3-Di-VC-USD-Lens.aspx

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Forget my ignorance but I am not familiar with a Nikon 100-400 lens. I do know about the 80-400 VR ( I still use the old version) and I know it is a very good optics although with a slow AF due to its old technology.
I favor lenses made by the manufacturer of the camera unless price is not affordable. Tamron and Sigma, from what I know and I have seen manufacture very good optics although there have been issues at times with their mechanical construction and quality control.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

Chris T wrote:

Maybe, but overall ... I suspect the Tamron is a better lens ....

This guy's review is all aglow, Sky ...

Perhaps, you can find a link there, so you can compare it with the Nikon ....

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-100-400mm-f-4.5-6.3-Di-VC-USD-Lens.aspx

Talked with a Tamron rep a couple weeks ago, lot of interesting info. Did you know that Tamron is the largest manufacturer of lenses, bigger than Canon, Nikon, and Sony combined. They probably won't come out with Fuji mounts because Fuji lenses are at basically the same quality/price point as Tamron and they can't offer a lens significantly cheaper than Fuji does.

Country Boy Loc: Beckley, WV

I don't know the answer as to best brand but I do know that being the largest in manufacturer does allow them to manage price and control their market better. However, what I don't know is which company has the most defined quality control process? I have known some small suppliers of technical equipment that specialized in being the highest in quality. Just a point to consider.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

Country Boy wrote:

I don't know the answer as to best brand but I do know that being the largest in manufacturer does allow them to manage price and control their market better. However, what I don't know is which company has the most defined quality control process? I have known some small suppliers of technical equipment that specialized in being the highest in quality. Just a point to consider.

Back before computer control, it was said that the reason Leica lenses where better was they failed more than Canon or Nikon. Tighter quality control.

smartet

I am renting the Tamron for 7 days. I also rented the tripod collar. It arrives Monaday and I will go shoot with it Wednesday through Friday. One thing to remember, Sigma has no tripod collar available for thier 100-400.
I am looking at it as a replacement for my 150-600 Tamrom G2 which is an excellent lens. It is just to big to hand hold anymore. I know it does not have the same reach but on a DX it will be close enough.
The Tamrom is a 4.5-5.6. The Sigma is a 5-6.3

3dees

for me it was between the Sigma and Tamron. couldn't see paying 2500.00 for the Nikon. I went with the Sigma. while there is no tri pod collar, the lens is light enough to shoot without it. watched reviews and some say the Sigma is even better than the Canon L. so far I'm loving it. 700.00 plus a free dock was a steal.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Chris T wrote:

Just got through reading an exhaustive piece on the new Tamron. Am interested to know if anyone here has yet gone that route, and if so, are they pleased ... ?

Can you give us a link to this "exhaustive piece" please ?? ! Thanks.

OK, now I see it - I think ....8-)

Ira

Here are shots taken from a D7200 and the Tamron 100-400. Both are not cropped. I did use the Tap-In consol to make fine tune adjustments to the lens.
I also have the 150-600 g2 and have adjusted that too and I think the 150-600mm is sharper then 100-400.

Hand Held at roughly 20 feet at 400mm 1/1250 f11 ISO 400 with VC ON No Sharpenig only highlights and shadows adjusted in lightroom

(Download)

On a tripod roughly 1000 feet at 400mm 1/100 f7.1 ISO 100 VC OFF no sharpening no adjustments

(Download)

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

camerapapi wrote:

Forget my ignorance but I am not familiar with a Nikon 100-400 lens. I do know about the 80-400 VR ( I still use the old version) and I know it is a very good optics although with a slow AF due to its old technology.
I favor lenses made by the manufacturer of the camera unless price is not affordable. Tamron and Sigma, from what I know and I have seen manufacture very good optics although there have been issues at times with their mechanical construction and quality control.

Don't think there IS a Nikon 100-400, William ...

Perhaps, I should have phrased it differently ...

I guess I expected readers would connect the dots ... 100-400 (Canon, Tamron, Sigma) 80-400 (Nikon, Tokina) ...

There have been issues with QC with Sigma (not too sure about Tamron, tho') ... take a fresh look ... some of the best glass, out there - is 3rd Party stuff ...

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

wmurnahan wrote:

Talked with a Tamron rep a couple weeks ago, lot of interesting info. Did you know that Tamron is the largest manufacturer of lenses, bigger than Canon, Nikon, and Sony combined. They probably won't come out with Fuji mounts because Fuji lenses are at basically the same quality/price point as Tamron and they can't offer a lens significantly cheaper than Fuji does.

I'm not at all surprised, actually, Bill ...

And they don't complicate things by throwing a camera or two into their inventory, like their cohorts over at Sigma ....

Probably ... if you have a Fuji ... stay with Fujinon glass ... it's a safe bet ....

But, if you use any other brand of DSLR ... look at the 3rd Party alternatives ... you could get as good quality (or, better) and save a buck or two, in the process!