Lens Advise - Canon 400mm - F/5.6 or Tamron 150-600 V1

GeoffMoorePhotography

GeoffMoorePhotography

Suspended / Banned
Messages
550
Name
Geoff
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,
With RIAT in the back of my mind I have been thinking about selling up on the Tamron 150-600mm and purchasing the Canon 400mm - F/5.6 - My reasoning is this...

From the past 2 or 3 airshows I have attended, my focal length is always around the 400mm / 450mm Mark, using the Tamron and around 15k plus images its 80% of the time in this range.
I dont use the lens for any other purpose, it just sits in its box ready for RIAT. So, does any one have experience with the Canon optically speaking when compared to the Tammy gen1?

I appreciate the advantage of the Tammy is the zoom range, but for Takeoffs and landings I have a 2nd body for that.

I look forward to your thoughts.

Regards
Geoff
 
I had a Canon 100/400 mk 1 and a Canon 400 f5.6 at the same time that I used at air shows, the zoom despite being used mainly at the long end was always my preferred option, partly because of the zoom, partly because of the IS (which I used even with fast shutter speeds) and partly because although I had a good copy of the prime just seemed so close to the same sharpness there wasnt much point in having both.
I liked my 400 prime but it just didnt give me anything the zoom didnt, eventually I bought a 300 f4 IS instead and that's my goto lens now, although since the Vulcan stopped flying and the restrictions on displays following Shoreham I havent been to a show.
 
Thanks Mat, I might see about renting the Canon this year, My original plan a few years back was to get the Canon 100-400Mk2 but I couldn't justify the cost (still cant) as such the Tamron, won the day with the versatility of the zoom and price etc, but I have always found myself slightly frustrated with overall quality of the images it produces.
 
I think the advantages of the Mk2 only work if you have a late dated body or convertor for instance some of the additional focus points arent activated on my 5D3, so for me it wouldnt matter if I used a mk1 or 2 in respect of greater AF accuracy (in general). Best to check the manual of the camera you have to see if it can take advantage, although I think the AF speed and the image quality etc are obviously better from what I have read on the mk2 than the mk1 it just depends on how fussy you are and what camera you have as to if it's worth the investment. I had no qualms about the quality at 400 on the zoom compared to the 400 prime, I'm tempted to think I may have been the limiting factor.
Renting sounds like a very good idea.
 
Canon 400 5.6L has endured past its sell-by date because it's still a very sharp and affordable option, and much lighter/shorter than a 150-600 zoom.

The pros and cons are pretty obvious - fixed focal length, long closest focusing distance, no image stabilisation. Lack of IS might be an issue if you want to drop the shutter speed for prop-blur, but you could sort that with a monopod. If image quality is the priority, the Canon would win, but not by a huge amount and you'll throw it away if you have to crop.
 
Thank you MatBin & HoppyUK - I must admit in my rush to place my lunch order I forgot to add the camera being used, that being a 7D2. Image quality is what I'm looking for over versatility now. Simply because the 150-600 zoom is never used unless I'm at an Airshow. My primary camera system is now Pentax. Some food for thought in your replies above. Without a convincing argument for thw Canon, I might be better positioned to hold on to the Tamron and rent the Canon for the 3 days this year, think it came to something like £50-£80
 
Renting is a good idea, but book it early. They're always very busy with long telephotos around big sporting events.
 
Personally I have got very good results with the Tamron 150-600 Mk1. I believe the Mk2 is slightly better in most respects if you're thinking of upgrading. While it is more expensive you can get it for less than a Mk 1 if you are willing to buy a grey import. Eglobalcentral have it for a very good price.
 
The 400mm is a fair bit lighter and is £759 new grey with e-infin.

However I can guarantee you will miss zoom in ten minutes flat.

Try forcing yourself to use 400 only for a month and see how frustrated you get or you may not.
 
•


The better investment will always be an
IF lens — prime or zoomed… but IF. :cool:
 
@GTG - this is the point. 80% of my images taken on the Tamron over 15k images are between 400mm and 450mm . I simply don't use it for anything else other than Airshows, thus the trade off isnt the loss of zoom, rather, my question pivots on the image quality of the Canon 400mm over the Tamron at around 400mm
 
Geoff Moore said:
@GTG - this is the point. 80% of my images taken on the Tamron over 15k images are between 400mm and 450mm . I simply don't use it for anything else other than Airshows, thus the trade off isnt the loss of zoom, rather, my question pivots on the image quality of the Canon 400mm over the Tamron at around 400mm
Click to expand...
It could be Internal Focusing, but my guess is it isnt. :-)
 
Geoff Moore said:
hat is this IF you speak of ?
Click to expand...


I am with Nikon and it is called IF for Internal Focusing.
With these, there is no air exchange between the lens
and the environment it works in… no dust, no pollen etc.!

:cool:
 
Last edited:
Kodiak Qc said:
I am with Nikon and it is called IF for Internal Focusing.
With these, there is no air exchange between the lens
and the environment it works in… no dust, no poles etc.!

:cool:
Click to expand...

You mean, in effect, non-extending. A marginal benefit, and non-extending tele-zooms are longer at shorter focal lengths. Apart from that, Canon only has one IF zoom with 400mm - the 200-400L at £10k. Nikon similar.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
Really? o_O(n)
Click to expand...

Sure, a non-extending barrel a 'nice to have' feature with, in theory, better sealing against dust etc, but it makes the lens heavier and bigger in the short focal length position. That's okay with a 70-200, but less so with longer telezooms - which is one of the reasons why there aren't any ;)
 
The iQ of the canon makes the Tamron look like a toy . It was the go to lens of birders for donkeys years ,is super sharp wide open all day long ,stopping it down simply increases d.o.f .
on a decent day simply dial in f.5.6 set your iso and point and shoot ,it’s also lightning fast to focus and quiet simply doesnt need I.s .and they hold there used price simpl6 because they are so good

Do a simple search on flickr
 
Last edited:
•


When ever a IF version is made, it will have my preference.
The way I see it, Geoff is not too bony, quite young and has
many years to enjoy a good investment.
 
I use the 400mm canon with a 1.4tc on a 7d2, tack sharp. It's perfect for wildlife, and will be for airshows etc. Just stand further away and zoom with your feet:D

IS isn't needed too much when panning bif anyway so the canon is a win for me again. Also the focusing works with centre point and surrounding points on a 7d2 if you ever get the 1.4tc too.
 
Thanks for the comments guys and feedback, very helpful. I suspect not being overly impressed with the Tamron in IQ any improvement the cannon has in this regard I will see as a win. I have read plenty about the Canon and TC's and the with the 1.4's seems IQ loss is marginal. --- I think Renting will be the way forward. At RIAT this year then I plan to do a day shooting with the Tamron and day with the Canon .. exciting!
 
Geoff Moore said:
Thanks for the comments guys and feedback, very helpful. I suspect not being overly impressed with the Tamron in IQ any improvement the cannon has in this regard I will see as a win. I have read plenty about the Canon and TC's and the with the 1.4's seems IQ loss is marginal. --- I think Renting will be the way forward. At RIAT this year then I plan to do a day shooting with the Tamron and day with the Canon .. exciting!
Click to expand...

As you say, rent and see how you go. For myself, not being able to take advantage of take off/landing shots would be a big issue for me at RIAT. However, a second body with a shorter lens could cover that.
 
jj_glos said:
As you say, rent and see how you go. For myself, not being able to take advantage of take off/landing shots would be a big issue for me at RIAT. However, a second body with a shorter lens could cover that.
Click to expand...
I have a second 7D2 with a 70-200 F4 IS L for that :)
 
Well I can only say I have the 400/5.6 and it is excellent and super sharp. It will probably outresolve a x-600mm zoom; no problem with cropping a little on modern cameras. If you need to go wider quickly well that's going to be a problem then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top