Tamron 100-400 on R bodies?

[dlee13]

So I’m wondering how many here use the Tamron 100-400mm EF lens on RF mount bodies?

I’m curious about this lens but see mixed reviews in terms of performance at 400mm. Most of these reviews are with DSLR’s which makes me wonder if it was just focus issues that wouldn’t be present on a mirrorless body.

I’m also waiting to see what the rumored RF 100-400mm lens will bring price and performance wise but this Tamron lens is a strong consideration mainly for cityscapes and maybe some wildlife.

It’s probably also worth mentioning that renting isn’t an option where I live also there’s no real 14 day refund policy.

 

[snappy604]

not familiar with the tamron 100-400, but the sigma 150-600 Contemporary is a low cost alternative with larger zoom.. works just fine on my R5 with the canon adapter. Likely canon native glass works better, but its definitely no slouch and half the price at least.

 

[dlee13]

not familiar with the tamron 100-400, but the sigma 150-600 Contemporary is a low cost alternative with larger zoom.. works just fine on my R5 with the canon adapter. Likely canon native glass works better, but its definitely no slouch and half the price at least.

Yeah I see Tamron have a 150-600mm G2 as well which has great reviews but both that and the Sigma one are about $800 AUD more than the Tamron 100-400mm.

I think the smaller size of the 100-400mm is appealing to me too.

 

[snappy604]

Yeah I see Tamron have a 150-600mm G2 as well which has great reviews but both that and the Sigma one are about $800 AUD more than the Tamron 100-400mm.

I think the smaller size of the 100-400mm is appealing to me too.

totally fair, everyone has different needs. For wildlife usually the larger reach is desired, but yes its bigger/heavier. Oddly autofocus even works with the 1.4x TC with the lens at 600... I have both the first gen canon tc and a current sigma tc.. the sigma TC is honestly entirely too soft.

Main point was that it works just as well or better on the RF vs the EF with the adapter (you get IBIS on top of it's IS). Just remember to turn off optimizations on the lenses for 3rd party lenses or you'll get that weird circular artifact.

 

[dlee13]

totally fair, everyone has different needs. For wildlife usually the larger reach is desired, but yes its bigger/heavier. Oddly autofocus even works with the 1.4x TC with the lens at 600... I have both the first gen canon tc and a current sigma tc.. the sigma TC is honestly entirely too soft.

Main point was that it works just as well or better on the RF vs the EF with the adapter (you get IBIS on top of it's IS). Just remember to turn off optimizations on the lenses for 3rd party lenses or you'll get that weird circular artifact.

Yeah I think if it was primarily for wildlife I’d prefer the 150-600mm, I see both are around 2kg though which would make traveling with them a hassle. For me it’s mainly cityscapes when I travel so the smaller and lighter the better, another reason I’m willing to wait and see what that RF 100-400mm has to offer once announced.

Are you using the contemporary one though or the sports version?

 

[snappy604]

Yeah I think if it was primarily for wildlife I’d prefer the 150-600mm, I see both are around 2kg though which would make traveling with them a hassle. For me it’s mainly cityscapes when I travel so the smaller and lighter the better, another reason I’m willing to wait and see what that RF 100-400mm has to offer once announced.

Are you using the contemporary one though or the sports version?

contemporary. the sports is a fair bit more in cost and I quality wasn't much different, it was more weather resistance.. maybe focus motor, but honestly get all I need out of the contemporary. I am tempted by the canon 100-500 RF but it's cost is... steep.

 

[dlee13]

contemporary. the sports is a fair bit more in cost and I quality wasn't much different, it was more weather resistance.. maybe focus motor, but honestly get all I need out of the contemporary. I am tempted by the canon 100-500 RF but it's cost is... steep.

I thought so! The Sigma contemporary is much cheaper than the Tamron, around $1200 AUD. With either of these lenses I’d need the EF to RF adapter and potentially a dock to update the lenses. I’m hoping these costs work out to be the same or more than the RF 100-400mm once announced. Maybe you can consider that too once we get a proper announcement.

 

[snappy604]

I thought so! The Sigma contemporary is much cheaper than the Tamron, around $1200 AUD. With either of these lenses I’d need the EF to RF adapter and potentially a dock to update the lenses. I’m hoping these costs work out to be the same or more than the RF 100-400mm once announced. Maybe you can consider that too once we get a proper announcement.

I have other sigma EF lenses so the dock and adapter were already needed plus for me the extra reach is a gain. I tend to like wildlife photography a fair bit

now this is more about the R5 and it's capabilities (such as 45MP).. but this is the R5 + sigma 150-600 C + canon TC 1.4x version 1.. it was a quick and dirty test and I'll have to more controlled in future but it acted like a nice telescope (on a tripod, not sure how it'd do handheld)

 

[dlee13]

I have other sigma EF lenses so the dock and adapter were already needed plus for me the extra reach is a gain. I tend to like wildlife photography a fair bit

Oh easy for you then! I went from Canon to Sony and sold all my EF gear as I knew I wanted to go RF when I swap back. Now I’m back I’m tempted by the EF lenses but trying to control my GAS haha.

Yeah I’ve only tried bird shots once but really enjoyed it! I used the Sony 200-600 for a few hours which was quite tiring after a while but was definitely fun. Sports can be quite fun too.

 

[snappy604]

Oh easy for you then! I went from Canon to Sony and sold all my EF gear as I knew I wanted to go RF when I swap back. Now I’m back I’m tempted by the EF lenses but trying to control my GAS haha.

Yeah I’ve only tried bird shots once but really enjoyed it! I used the Sony 200-600 for a few hours which was quite tiring after a while but was definitely fun. Sports can be quite fun too.

yeah the super telephotos are hard to do for long periods.. trying to perfect a technique I saw online with monopods.. shows promise but still not nailing it. basically I use a tripod head at 90 degrees on the monopod and rotate the mountain bracket on the lens and leave it a bit loose and leave the rotation on the head for up down.. it acts almost like a gimbal.. have to wait for weather to improve to try it more.

certainly was tempted to migrate for a while... canon was being pretty conservative, but glad I held off and also glad I kept my EF glass.. honestly it works just as good or better than on EF bodies.. the autofocus system is a huge leap and the IBIS helps. It'll only get better as they evolve it. Funny enough there was a lot of used EF glass for a couple of years, starting to see a lot more used sony glass locally lately.

 

[dlee13]

yeah the super telephotos are hard to do for long periods.. trying to perfect a technique I saw online with monopods.. shows promise but still not nailing it. basically I use a tripod head at 90 degrees on the monopod and rotate the mountain bracket on the lens and leave it a bit loose and leave the rotation on the head for up down.. it acts almost like a gimbal.. have to wait for weather to improve to try it more.

certainly was tempted to migrate for a while... canon was being pretty conservative, but glad I held off and also glad I kept my EF glass.. honestly it works just as good or better than on EF bodies.. the autofocus system is a huge leap and the IBIS helps. It'll only get better as they evolve it. Funny enough there was a lot of used EF glass for a couple of years, starting to see a lot more used sony glass locally lately.

I think I'd definitely invest in a monopod if I got a super tele. Do you have any back issues? For my my back is what limits how heavy my gear can be. It's a lot better these days but there was a period that even carrying a 6D and EF 35mm f/2 IS was too much for me.

Lucky you didn't then as when I switched, it was purely out of GAS. I originally wanted to run dual systems and still would if it wasn't so costly. Yeah tbh I feel that a lot of EF lenses from both Canon and third parties performed a lot better than they got credit for and a lot of the soft images were from missed focus. I loved my EF 35mm f/2 IS but it would always give me mixed results. When I used it on my A7III it focused perfectly and was always consistently sharp and never soft.

With the Tamron I see varying results at 400mm with some images showing great sharpness and others saying it's quite soft. Most of these reviews are with DSLR's which makes me think it's the focus issue and not so much the properties of the lens.

 

[snappy604]

I think I'd definitely invest in a monopod if I got a super tele. Do you have any back issues? For my my back is what limits how heavy my gear can be. It's a lot better these days but there was a period that even carrying a 6D and EF 35mm f/2 IS was too much for me.

Lucky you didn't then as when I switched, it was purely out of GAS. I originally wanted to run dual systems and still would if it wasn't so costly. Yeah tbh I feel that a lot of EF lenses from both Canon and third parties performed a lot better than they got credit for and a lot of the soft images were from missed focus. I loved my EF 35mm f/2 IS but it would always give me mixed results. When I used it on my A7III it focused perfectly and was always consistently sharp and never soft.

With the Tamron I see varying results at 400mm with some images showing great sharpness and others saying it's quite soft. Most of these reviews are with DSLR's which makes me think it's the focus issue and not so much the properties of the lens.

back and arm becoming more issues as I age ... the focus engine is a huge improvement.. not perfect as some credit, but huge improvement. However there are so many options with autofocus it gets its own menu now... learning to maximize it really takes some getting used to and knowing/remembering when to change it takes a bit of getting used to... like changing between people and animals .. now programmed in custom, but also the continuous autofocus can be outright annoying at times yet horribly useful... it keeps trying to focus on something when you point down or away from your subject or just have the camera on and walking so you're ready.. but damn useful when you are ready. another is learning to set a start area for the focus and then compose and have it track vs it trying to figure out what you're trying to focus on.. how well it flips/locks on etc.. still scratching my head on many options

 

[dlee13]

back and arm becoming more issues as I age ... the focus engine is a huge improvement.. not perfect as some credit, but huge improvement. However there are so many options with autofocus it gets its own menu now... learning to maximize it really takes some getting used to and knowing/remembering when to change it takes a bit of getting used to... like changing between people and animals .. now programmed in custom, but also the continuous autofocus can be outright annoying at times yet horribly useful... it keeps trying to focus on something when you point down or away from your subject or just have the camera on and walking so you're ready.. but damn useful when you are ready. another is learning to set a start area for the focus and then compose and have it track vs it trying to figure out what you're trying to focus on.. how well it flips/locks on etc.. still scratching my head on many options

Yeah getting older isn't fun... lol. You'll get used to it over time and the custom buttons make it so much easier. For me it took a bit of getting used to mainly due to the location of Sony buttons being in my muscle memory but I'm already more used to the R6 now. The tracking is definitely amazing though and I really love how it just sticks to the subject. I feel like that plus the 20fps would make shooting wild life even more fun.