Tamron 18-400mm Thoughts

Astonishing focal length coverage, needs to have some more reviews done but AP have recommended it. If you could only have 1 lens on your camera.........

 

it's a compromise lens, but a very decent compromise. it means if you're going out for a day of shooting all sorts of stuff, you won't have to change lenses and risk missing a shot while you do. and for those DSLR users who don't like changing lenses, this one has got you covered. it's not going to compete with my nikon P610 with its 1440mm or its bigger brother the P900 with its 2000mm (i rented one of those, and was able to shoot birds that were really far away). but it's going to get those who want to shoot both wildlife and family pics on the same day what they need.

b&h says it weighs only 1.56 lbs, which is quite good for that much lens, it's stabilized and gives a comparable 35mm Focal Length: 28.8 - 640 mm. that competes with cameras like the FZ1000 and the FZ300 pretty nicely. i imagine image quality will be average at the long end, but overall this could be a very handy lens for those who need it.

 

"Compromise.."
Interesting word here. Especially considering ALL zoom lenses are a compromise of some sort..! Some more than others.
On one hand, Tamron's made some nice zoom lenses, on the other hand, they've also made some, well, duds.

I have an old Tamron zoom that works very nicely sharpness wise. I also have one that's essentially junk.

Mike

 

i didn't mean compromise in a perjoritave way, and in fact i like less expensive zooms like the 55-250 STM. compromise is a good thing. it often means you can have most of what you want and long as you're willing to give way on something. anyone who shoots birds or wildlife or distant subjext but doesn't want to bring multiple lenses or change lenses while out and about are going to love having a lens that's 400mm on the long end instead of the usual 200 to 300.

i've been looking for a fast stabilized prime for my SL1, and guys on dpreview recommended a couple tamrons to consider. i haven't made a decision on which lens to get, but the samples they showed me were very sharp and quality overall was very nice. i'll be interested to see how this lens does once it's released.

 

Lately, both Sigma and Tamron gave us some nice surprises with their new lenses. If someone ask me 3 years ago what I think about a lens with big zoom, I would have tell him that the IQ can't be very good. Now, I don't know. So, I wait to see reviews of this 18-400. It could be a game changer.

Personally, my all time lens is Canon 18-135 STM, which surprised me with his IQ. Of course, not the best, but very good. So, I'm really curious about this Tamron.

 

Pcake, if you are looking for a fast zoom, like a 17-50mm/f2.8 constant, I can tell my experience. Tamron could be (or not) a hair sharper than Sigma, but is not very reliable. I had both. Sigma is much more reliable than Tamron, but miss focus by a little sometime. In fact, only one Tamron from 4 that I had didn't give me problems. The 70-200mm/F2.8 non VC, used with Pentax. Of course, I am not talking about the last generation from Tamron, with white colar at the base.
Same thing can be seem on the second-hand market in my country, where the price of a Tamron 17-50mm/F2.8 VC is 2/3 of a Sigma 17-50mm/F2.8 OS. Frankly, I'm sorry that I sold my Sigma, but not about Tamron.

 

you say the sigma misses focus sometimes. in what way is the tamron less repliable?

btw, i'm looking for a birding zoom, and 200mm isn't enough when shooting birds, particularly in flight.

 

They broke. With a Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 I was at the repar shop 3 times, because of some contacts or switches inside (I think). My Tamron 70-300mm non IS became very stiff, hard to move the zoom ring, and it was bought new, from a qualified shop. My sister's 70-300mm simply stop working in AF.

For birding, I would go for that new Sigma 100-400. Light weight, and very sharp.

 

wow, that's not good i was going to get a tamron 45mm, but now i'm rethinking that.

thanks - i'll rent one and see how it does!

 

Tamron 45 is from this new generation, with white colar at his base, and I can't tell anything about built quality and functionallity in time.

A good indicator you can use is the second-hand market. If a new lens comes to often in this market, is not a good sign. Especially if professional reviews about it are good. Professional reviewers always test something for a short period, not more than a month or two, usually less. Also, discutions in the DPReview.

 

Well...I've got four Tamron lenses.
One is about 30 years old, one about 20 years old, one is about three, one is about 1 year old.
All still work the same as they did when purchased.
One old 18-200 should have been returned. Just not a good lens.
I have two 18-250's (for different body brands), one is OLD, one is about three, both still work nicely. The 28-300 is the newest and works just fine.

Don't let one or two apparent bad lenses bother you. After all, they may have gone thru an apocalypse or something..!

Mike