Which to go for with 70D 400f5.6 or Tamron 150-600

Hi I did ask this question a week ago and was thinking of the new 100-400 II but finances have changed so that option is out. I have ordered a 70D and either have the choice of a second hand Canon 400 f5.6 or a Tamron 150-600 new. I am tempted by the versatility of the zoom but know that the prime will be sharper but does not have IS (monopod needed) and the prime has a longer minimum focus also. I shoot wildlife including birds and the odd airshow when I can get to them. So which one would you choose?

I would go for the versatility of the zoom, in addition to the other reasons. IMO sharpness is overrated unless you have a specific need.

Bigbob Irwin said:

Hi I did ask this question a week ago and was thinking of the new 100-400 II but finances have changed so that option is out. I have ordered a 70D and either have the choice of a second hand Canon 400 f5.6 or a Tamron 150-600 new. I am tempted by the versatility of the zoom but know that the prime will be sharper but does not have IS (monopod needed) and the prime has a longer minimum focus also. I shoot wildlife including birds and the odd airshow when I can get to them. So which one would you choose?

Click to expand...

I'm spoiled. I bought my first stabilized lens in 2001, and I just can't go back for the long stuff. Even sold my 100 f2.8 EF Macro for the stabilized L version solely for that reason.

The Tamron 150-600 is my only non-Canon autofocus lens. I use it only for personal pleasure, not for business. And it's a joy, indeed, to use. Very powerful, versatile, and high quality.

Back in the 80s, I used a 500mm mirror lens for shooting college football. Geez, I couldn't imagine doing that today. Both AF and IS are technologies I'd personally rather not do without.

Thank,s

Will get the Zoom

Bigbob Irwin said:

Hi I did ask this question a week ago and was thinking of the new 100-400 II but finances have changed so that option is out. I have ordered a 70D and either have the choice of a second hand Canon 400 f5.6 or a Tamron 150-600 new. I am tempted by the versatility of the zoom but know that the prime will be sharper but does not have IS (monopod needed) and the prime has a longer minimum focus also. I shoot wildlife including birds and the odd airshow when I can get to them. So which one would you choose?

Click to expand...

I would get the prime ( I have both lenses and prefer the prime 9 times out of 10). It is much sharper & faster. Crop to make up the difference.

Hi Roger,

I think you replied to my original thread about a week ago and I have had a look at finances and have managed by selling a few other bits to get the 100-400 IS II. am going to pick it up tomorrow and will post when I get a chance to shoot. Thanks for your advice.

Bigbob Irwin said:

Hi I did ask this question a week ago and was thinking of the new 100-400 II but finances have changed so that option is out. I have ordered a 70D and either have the choice of a second hand Canon 400 f5.6 or a Tamron 150-600 new. I am tempted by the versatility of the zoom but know that the prime will be sharper but does not have IS (monopod needed) and the prime has a longer minimum focus also. I shoot wildlife including birds and the odd airshow when I can get to them. So which one would you choose?

Click to expand...

The 400 F5.6 is sharp wide open with minimal CA for distant objects. It is light and easy to carry for extended periods of time. No IS is of no consequence in good light as shutter speeds are over 1000 every time I use it. It has very fast focusing and has a built in hood which is very nice. I can se this lens on TV, 1600 shutter, auto ISO, AI servo and get fantastic shots all day long. It uses popular 77mm filters (if you use them). The build quality is exceptional.

The Tamron 150-600 is very sharp through about 400mm and starts to soften a little thereafter. For distant subjects (100+ feet), however, I noticed some CA and softness. F8 is a sweet spot, but I've seen some nice shots down to F6.3. I had better luck using it in AV. It is hand hold able, but is much heavier than the 400 F5.6 and harder to work with for extended periods of time without a pod. I was very impressed with the fast focus on this lens and the build quality is very good. It uses 95mm filters and a BW MRC will run you about $140 (again, if you use them). For large subjects (i.e deer) within 50 feet or so, you can get very nice sharp shots. Small birds within 20' are very sharp too. I decided to return it to buy another lens.

Tough decision!

Well in the end I went for the expensive option and that's me back home with the 100-400 II. now I am champing at the bit for the 70D to arrive.

Congrats on the new lens, I’m still waiting for one to show up at my dealers shop. I have the 400 5.6 and the Tamron 150-600 but the minimum focusing distance on the new 100-400 sealed the deal for me.

Bob

Hope the lens comes soon for you Bob.

at least that would be it for me. But I am a small woman. Shutter speeds are generally fairly high when shooting BIF, even if you are wanting a little wing blur. IS not necessary at my typical BIF shutter setting of 1/1000 or higher. Good holding and panning technique IS necessary even at high shutter speeds - takes practice. 400 f/5.6L is a very well balanced and relatively light lens to hold. I would need to bulk up some to handle a 7 to 8.5 pound f/4.0 lens, the next step up. More weight on the curls and presses!

Now if you are a strong or average guy you might do fine with a heavy lens handheld. And there's no question that image stabilization is wonderful when photographing distant still objects / organisms.

Bigbob Irwin said:

Hi Roger,

I think you replied to my original thread about a week ago and I have had a look at finances and have managed by selling a few other bits to get the 100-400 IS II. am going to pick it up tomorrow and will post when I get a chance to shoot. Thanks for your advice.

Click to expand...

I think you will be happy with that choice. Sometimes you just have to pony up to get what you want. That 3.2 ft min focus distance and fast AF are killers for this lens. I don't need another lens but I want this one.

Bigbob Irwin said:

Hi I did ask this question a week ago and was thinking of the new 100-400 II but finances have changed so that option is out. I have ordered a 70D and either have the choice of a second hand Canon 400 f5.6 or a Tamron 150-600 new. I am tempted by the versatility of the zoom but know that the prime will be sharper but does not have IS (monopod needed) and the prime has a longer minimum focus also. I shoot wildlife including birds and the odd airshow when I can get to them. So which one would you choose?

Click to expand...

How do you plan to use them? Hand-held, even without IS, the 2.75 lb 400/5.6L is going to be easier to handle on long hikes and swinging to pan a BIF than the 4.3 lb and 3-7" longer 150-600. A monopod would be recommended for either.

IMHO, YMMV.

I am debating getting one of the 150-600MM, I have 400 MM F5.6 which is nice handling for sure and plety sharp when used correctly, I am waiting for Sigma to start shipping their 2 versions, to compare before I decide which one to get... The sports version is 2 pounds heavier, but if IQ is that much better I may go for that one, either for my 7D or D7100, but I would like to see more results from the Sigma C lens to the Tamron which are close in price before deciding which, or to pay an extra grand for sports version.. I really do prefer primes though, so unless they blow away the 400 F5.6 I will stick with it, and just get closer to the action

I often wonder why long zooms have to have such much range. people that want a 600MM lens would probably more than be happy with like a 300-600 range.. would that make a lens faster? less expensive? or even a 250-500, less zooming.. we have plenty of lenses covering the close end already.. with my long zoom, I doubt I have taken 3 percent or less photos at anything but the longest end.. a 200 to 400 is nice but I would rather have a 300-600 for birding if it were to be a zoom

Look at the shot this guy gets with the Tamron. It's 95% the photographer!


-Bill