Tamron 18-400mm VC HLD Review | Dustin

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Hello, everyone. Tamron Canada got me a retail copy of the new Tamron 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 VC HLD lens to review, and I've got my conclusions here:


Text Review: http://bit.ly/18400HLDda
Video Review: http://bit.ly/18400HLD
Image Gallery: http://bit.ly/Tam18400IG

It seems to me that Tamron did what they needed to with this lens. It will market very well due to the specs, but I also didn’t see any area where the lens regressed compared to earlier lenses with smaller zoom ratios. As someone whose lens kit is primarily made up of prime lenses, this kind of lens doesn't personally set me on fire, but it's a very competent lens for those looking for a travel lens with a huge zoom range.

P.S. For those interested, I have just started reviewing the Sigma 24-70 ART, so stay posted for that. I'm releasing the Zeiss Milvus 35mm f/1.4 review next week along with the Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS review the week following. I've also (due to a LOT of requests) added a Sony a6500 to my personal kit and am about to start a staggered release of Sony mirrorless reviews, including the Zeiss Touit line and Sigma's DN line. I've gotten all of these as sets, so I will mostly be reviewing them as such (more like mini-reviews around a common theme).

 

[candyman]

Thank you for taking time and sharing your professional view on lenses and cameras. Highly appreciated. Keep up spoiling us.


Of course I look forward to the review battle between the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 ART, the Tamron 24-70 G1, the Tamron 24-70 G2 and the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II
Now that is something I think a lot of people look forward to...

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Thank you for taking time and sharing your professional view on lenses and cameras. Highly appreciated. Keep up spoiling us.


Of course I look forward to the review battle between the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 ART, the Tamron 24-70 G1, the Tamron 24-70 G2 and the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II
Now that is something I think a lot of people look forward to...

I was hoping that all of the releases would line up nicely...and it looked like they were, and then the Canon mount of the G2 got delayed. I may still be able to pull it off, but it will depend on whether or not the Tamron arrives before I need to send the Sigma back. Even if it doesn't happen now, I may get everything in for sometime in the fall and do a shootout then. I've sold my 24-70 months ago in preparation for seeing which of these might be the most interesting. Problem, though. I've substituted my 35L II for wedding and event work, and have discovered I'm not really missing a 24-70 in my personal kit! The 35L II is just so good!

 

[Don Haines]

Thank you for a nice review.

This is a lens that I can see getting for use in my kayak..... you REALLY do not want to be changing lenses when the slightest slip is followed by a loud splash.....

I also note that the lens is used with the tap-in console. Kudos to Tamron, it is starting to look like all new lenses are going to be compatible, and that is a huge factor for those who worry about future software incompatibility as now a lens firmware update is just a click away.

 

[AlanF]

ePhotozine has just published the MTFs https://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-18-400mm-f-3-5-6-3-di-ii-vc-hld-review-31259

OK, it's only one copy tested, but it is so bad at 400mm it is absolutely dreadful. At 400mm f/6.3 and f/8, the MTFs are only 500 lw/ph, down by a factor of 5 from the best at 18mm. A 55-250mm STM cropped by 1.6x at 250mm would be sharper. The Tamron only becomes usable at f/11.

 

[AlanF]

I just borrowed a copy to test on my M5. The centre sharpness is quite the reverse of ePhotozine tests and really quite good, though edges are soft. Here is a 100% crop from a chart 12m away, handheld, compared with crops from a 100-400mm II and 400mm DO II. However, there is very strong focus breathing - the calculated focal length assuming the DO is 400mm is only 315mm at 12m.

 

[AJ]

However, there is very strong focus breathing - the calculated focal length assuming the DO is 400mm is only 315mm at 12m.

Interesting. By chance, do you know what the actual max focal length of the Sigma 100-400 is, at comparable focusing distance?

 

[AlanF]

y unfortunate coincidence, I cleared out files on the Sigma 100-400 last night but fortunately I had uploaded some to CR http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=32776.msg667775#msg667775

The Sigma 100-400mm at 10.5m is about 1.7% longer than the Canon 100-400mm at a nominal 400mm, which as you can see in this thread is slightly behind the 400mm DO at approx 370mm.

 

[AJ]

Thanks Alan! Those are helpful data.

 

[AlanF]

I was toying with the idea of the Tamron as the copy I tested was quite good. But, I will wait to see the expected 100-400mm as it should have better IQ at 400mm and I can also use it on FF.

 

[sanusense]

I love this Lens. Its a great lens to have for someone who loves to do photography as hobby. I can just take this lens and go. No more carrying multiple lenses. It is surprisingly crisp even at 400mm. The VC works great and auto focus seems pretty quick.

 

[avei]

Thanks man!

 

[AlanF]

I looked at another copy of the Tamron 18-400mm today as my local shop had a new copy. Same focus breathing as before - focal length at a nominal 400mm was 320mm at 12m. Unfortunately, the IQ of this one was very poor at the centre and complete garbage at the edges of the M5.

 

[Don Haines]

I looked at another copy of the Tamron 18-400mm today as my local shop had a new copy. Same focus breathing as before - focal length at a nominal 400mm was 320mm at 12m. Unfortunately, the IQ of this one was very poor at the centre and complete garbage at the edges of the M5.

Interesting.... sounds like an extreme amount of copy variation....

When I looked at the ephotozine article, the sharphness and chromatic aberration at 400mm were insanely bad... I wonder what the next review will show?

 

[maymac789]

Thanks ! very helpful data

 

[AlanF]

I looked at another copy of the Tamron 18-400mm today as my local shop had a new copy. Same focus breathing as before - focal length at a nominal 400mm was 320mm at 12m. Unfortunately, the IQ of this one was very poor at the centre and complete garbage at the edges of the M5.

Interesting.... sounds like an extreme amount of copy variation....

When I looked at the ephotozine article, the sharphness and chromatic aberration at 400mm were insanely bad... I wonder what the next review will show?

I have found my old files on the first 18-400 I tested. It was a good lens, much better than this new copy. ePhotozine had a poor copy whereas the Lenstip one seems better.

 

[Don Haines]

I looked at another copy of the Tamron 18-400mm today as my local shop had a new copy. Same focus breathing as before - focal length at a nominal 400mm was 320mm at 12m. Unfortunately, the IQ of this one was very poor at the centre and complete garbage at the edges of the M5.

Interesting.... sounds like an extreme amount of copy variation....

When I looked at the ephotozine article, the sharphness and chromatic aberration at 400mm were insanely bad... I wonder what the next review will show?

I have found my old files on the first 18-400 I tested. It was a good lens, much better than this new copy. ePhotozine had a poor copy whereas the Lenstip one seems better.

That makes me very nervous. The three section barrel may be a bit to complex to be accurate. Makes me wonder how robust the lens is, and how will it tolerate wear on that mechanism.....