Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD + R6

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

I got my R6 last week and this lens has started to peak my interest as a much cheaper alternative to the RF 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

Some more examples with the R6 and this lens from this week!



https://pkimages.zenfolio.com/p624844112

Click to expand...

Thanks for the samples, they look great but please don’t tempt me I think as someone previously mentioned I may wait for the RF 100-400mm as I don’t have any current EF lenses or the adapter.

Click to expand...

LOL I understand! But this has been a good solution for me. My only complaint is that the position of the focus and zoom rings and the rotate direction of the zoom ring is opposite that of Canon. I understand the Sigma 100-400 C is a similar lens without this issue. But the Tamron is slightly lighter so I went with this one. I am also interested to see what Canon may come up with in a RF 100-400.

Anyway happy new year and good luck!

Click to expand...

Well the more I think about it, the more I think this would be a better option than waiting. The RF 100-500mm goes for $4419 AUD so I don’t see the RF 100-400 being that much cheaper, probably at least $2.5k AUD which would be more than double what the Tamron plus RF Adapter costs.

From what I’ve seen from your images along with others online, the Tamron performs like native on the R bodies and IQ looks great so I may be best off buying it while sales are still on...

Happy new year to you too!

Click to expand...

Would be better just to get the EF 100-400 II, since it's a native lens, better IQ and focusing than the third party tamrons and sigmas.

Click to expand...

That one is $2975 AUD then the adapter is around $160 AUD so if I spend that much I rather just wait for the RF 100-400 haha

Click to expand...

I'm confused, if someone owns an R6, pair it with a good lens..?

Click to expand...

Some people have a budget which means they can’t just buy any lens they like?

Click to expand...

Then why own a $2600 camera? Legitimately curious.

Click to expand...

I sold all my previous gear which paid for the Canon gear without anything out of pocket. The 85mm F/2 replaced two lenses as well which made the switch even easier.

Also this 100-400mm lens would be my least used and a niche lens so doesn’t make sense to spend that much on it, I’d be better off buying an 85mm f/1.2 which is similar in price and I’d use heaps.

Click to expand...

Agree with your reasoning and would add that sometimes there are other considerations. For me personally (just me not everyone), I find the RF 100-500 and the EF 100-400 II too heavy. So the Tamron works better for me. I own and use good Canon glass including the RF 24-105 f4 L and the EF 70-200 F4 IS - but for this purpose (animal “portraits” at the zoo) - this lens is a great fit.

--
http://www.pkimages.com

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

I got my R6 last week and this lens has started to peak my interest as a much cheaper alternative to the RF 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

Some more examples with the R6 and this lens from this week!



https://pkimages.zenfolio.com/p624844112

Click to expand...

Thanks for the samples, they look great but please don’t tempt me I think as someone previously mentioned I may wait for the RF 100-400mm as I don’t have any current EF lenses or the adapter.

Click to expand...

LOL I understand! But this has been a good solution for me. My only complaint is that the position of the focus and zoom rings and the rotate direction of the zoom ring is opposite that of Canon. I understand the Sigma 100-400 C is a similar lens without this issue. But the Tamron is slightly lighter so I went with this one. I am also interested to see what Canon may come up with in a RF 100-400.

Anyway happy new year and good luck!

Click to expand...

Well the more I think about it, the more I think this would be a better option than waiting. The RF 100-500mm goes for $4419 AUD so I don’t see the RF 100-400 being that much cheaper, probably at least $2.5k AUD which would be more than double what the Tamron plus RF Adapter costs.

From what I’ve seen from your images along with others online, the Tamron performs like native on the R bodies and IQ looks great so I may be best off buying it while sales are still on...

Happy new year to you too!

Click to expand...

Would be better just to get the EF 100-400 II, since it's a native lens, better IQ and focusing than the third party tamrons and sigmas.

Click to expand...

That one is $2975 AUD then the adapter is around $160 AUD so if I spend that much I rather just wait for the RF 100-400 haha

Click to expand...

I'm confused, if someone owns an R6, pair it with a good lens..?

Click to expand...

Some people have a budget which means they can’t just buy any lens they like?

Click to expand...

Then why own a $2600 camera? Legitimately curious.

Click to expand...

I sold all my previous gear which paid for the Canon gear without anything out of pocket. The 85mm F/2 replaced two lenses as well which made the switch even easier.

Also this 100-400mm lens would be my least used and a niche lens so doesn’t make sense to spend that much on it, I’d be better off buying an 85mm f/1.2 which is similar in price and I’d use heaps.

Click to expand...

bernie r said:

1. bernie r wrote:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

I got my R6 last week and this lens has started to peak my interest as a much cheaper alternative to the RF 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

Some more examples with the R6 and this lens from this week!



https://pkimages.zenfolio.com/p624844112

Click to expand...

Thanks for the samples, they look great but please don’t tempt me I think as someone previously mentioned I may wait for the RF 100-400mm as I don’t have any current EF lenses or the adapter.

Click to expand...

LOL I understand! But this has been a good solution for me. My only complaint is that the position of the focus and zoom rings and the rotate direction of the zoom ring is opposite that of Canon. I understand the Sigma 100-400 C is a similar lens without this issue. But the Tamron is slightly lighter so I went with this one. I am also interested to see what Canon may come up with in a RF 100-400.

Anyway happy new year and good luck!

Click to expand...

Well the more I think about it, the more I think this would be a better option than waiting. The RF 100-500mm goes for $4419 AUD so I don’t see the RF 100-400 being that much cheaper, probably at least $2.5k AUD which would be more than double what the Tamron plus RF Adapter costs.

From what I’ve seen from your images along with others online, the Tamron performs like native on the R bodies and IQ looks great so I may be best off buying it while sales are still on...

Happy new year to you too!

Click to expand...

Would be better just to get the EF 100-400 II, since it's a native lens, better IQ and focusing than the third party tamrons and sigmas.

Click to expand...

That one is $2975 AUD then the adapter is around $160 AUD so if I spend that much I rather just wait for the RF 100-400 haha

Click to expand...

I'm confused, if someone owns an R6, pair it with a good lens..?

Click to expand...

Some people have a budget which means they can’t just buy any lens they like?

Click to expand...

Then why own a $2600 camera? Legitimately curious.

Click to expand...

I sold all my previous gear which paid for the Canon gear without anything out of pocket. The 85mm F/2 replaced two lenses as well which made the switch even easier.

Also this 100-400mm lens would be my least used and a niche lens so doesn’t make sense to spend that much on it, I’d be better off buying an 85mm f/1.2 which is similar in price and I’d use heaps.

Click to expand...

Then do that.

Only third party lens I haven't had issues with has been Sigma Art's, theirs and Tamrons zoom range has been garbage on the R cameras in my experience.

Click to expand...

Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD Review

photographylife.com

pkImages

Powered by SmugMug

www.pkimages.com

pkoenig2001 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

1. bernie r wrote:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

I got my R6 last week and this lens has started to peak my interest as a much cheaper alternative to the RF 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

Some more examples with the R6 and this lens from this week!



https://pkimages.zenfolio.com/p624844112

Click to expand...

Thanks for the samples, they look great but please don’t tempt me I think as someone previously mentioned I may wait for the RF 100-400mm as I don’t have any current EF lenses or the adapter.

Click to expand...

LOL I understand! But this has been a good solution for me. My only complaint is that the position of the focus and zoom rings and the rotate direction of the zoom ring is opposite that of Canon. I understand the Sigma 100-400 C is a similar lens without this issue. But the Tamron is slightly lighter so I went with this one. I am also interested to see what Canon may come up with in a RF 100-400.

Anyway happy new year and good luck!

Click to expand...

Well the more I think about it, the more I think this would be a better option than waiting. The RF 100-500mm goes for $4419 AUD so I don’t see the RF 100-400 being that much cheaper, probably at least $2.5k AUD which would be more than double what the Tamron plus RF Adapter costs.

From what I’ve seen from your images along with others online, the Tamron performs like native on the R bodies and IQ looks great so I may be best off buying it while sales are still on...

Happy new year to you too!

Click to expand...

Would be better just to get the EF 100-400 II, since it's a native lens, better IQ and focusing than the third party tamrons and sigmas.

Click to expand...

That one is $2975 AUD then the adapter is around $160 AUD so if I spend that much I rather just wait for the RF 100-400 haha

Click to expand...

I'm confused, if someone owns an R6, pair it with a good lens..?

Click to expand...

Some people have a budget which means they can’t just buy any lens they like?

Click to expand...

Then why own a $2600 camera? Legitimately curious.

Click to expand...

I sold all my previous gear which paid for the Canon gear without anything out of pocket. The 85mm F/2 replaced two lenses as well which made the switch even easier.

Also this 100-400mm lens would be my least used and a niche lens so doesn’t make sense to spend that much on it, I’d be better off buying an 85mm f/1.2 which is similar in price and I’d use heaps.

Click to expand...

Then do that.

Only third party lens I haven't had issues with has been Sigma Art's, theirs and Tamrons zoom range has been garbage on the R cameras in my experience.

Click to expand...

Understood but that clearly is not my experience with this lens. I posted samples and there is this published review which I have found to be accurate.

https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamron-100-400mm-f4-5-6-3

--
http://www.pkimages.com

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

1. bernie r wrote:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

I got my R6 last week and this lens has started to peak my interest as a much cheaper alternative to the RF 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

Some more examples with the R6 and this lens from this week!



https://pkimages.zenfolio.com/p624844112

Click to expand...

Thanks for the samples, they look great but please don’t tempt me I think as someone previously mentioned I may wait for the RF 100-400mm as I don’t have any current EF lenses or the adapter.

Click to expand...

LOL I understand! But this has been a good solution for me. My only complaint is that the position of the focus and zoom rings and the rotate direction of the zoom ring is opposite that of Canon. I understand the Sigma 100-400 C is a similar lens without this issue. But the Tamron is slightly lighter so I went with this one. I am also interested to see what Canon may come up with in a RF 100-400.

Anyway happy new year and good luck!

Click to expand...

Well the more I think about it, the more I think this would be a better option than waiting. The RF 100-500mm goes for $4419 AUD so I don’t see the RF 100-400 being that much cheaper, probably at least $2.5k AUD which would be more than double what the Tamron plus RF Adapter costs.

From what I’ve seen from your images along with others online, the Tamron performs like native on the R bodies and IQ looks great so I may be best off buying it while sales are still on...

Happy new year to you too!

Click to expand...

Would be better just to get the EF 100-400 II, since it's a native lens, better IQ and focusing than the third party tamrons and sigmas.

Click to expand...

That one is $2975 AUD then the adapter is around $160 AUD so if I spend that much I rather just wait for the RF 100-400 haha

Click to expand...

I'm confused, if someone owns an R6, pair it with a good lens..?

Click to expand...

Some people have a budget which means they can’t just buy any lens they like?

Click to expand...

Then why own a $2600 camera? Legitimately curious.

Click to expand...

I sold all my previous gear which paid for the Canon gear without anything out of pocket. The 85mm F/2 replaced two lenses as well which made the switch even easier.

Also this 100-400mm lens would be my least used and a niche lens so doesn’t make sense to spend that much on it, I’d be better off buying an 85mm f/1.2 which is similar in price and I’d use heaps.

Click to expand...

Then do that.

Only third party lens I haven't had issues with has been Sigma Art's, theirs and Tamrons zoom range has been garbage on the R cameras in my experience.

Click to expand...

Understood but that clearly is not my experience with this lens. I posted samples and there is this published review which I have found to be accurate.

https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamron-100-400mm-f4-5-6-3

Click to expand...

This review was very good and informative! The sales we had here weren’t anything special and I’m in no rush so I might just wait and see what this RF 100-400mm is like. Looking at how slow it is compared to previous lenses, hopefully it will be small and cheap.

Click to expand...

pkImages

Powered by SmugMug

www.pkimages.com

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

1. bernie r wrote:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

bernie r said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

I got my R6 last week and this lens has started to peak my interest as a much cheaper alternative to the RF 100-500mm.

Click to expand...

Some more examples with the R6 and this lens from this week!



https://pkimages.zenfolio.com/p624844112

Click to expand...

Thanks for the samples, they look great but please don’t tempt me I think as someone previously mentioned I may wait for the RF 100-400mm as I don’t have any current EF lenses or the adapter.

Click to expand...

LOL I understand! But this has been a good solution for me. My only complaint is that the position of the focus and zoom rings and the rotate direction of the zoom ring is opposite that of Canon. I understand the Sigma 100-400 C is a similar lens without this issue. But the Tamron is slightly lighter so I went with this one. I am also interested to see what Canon may come up with in a RF 100-400.

Anyway happy new year and good luck!

Click to expand...

Well the more I think about it, the more I think this would be a better option than waiting. The RF 100-500mm goes for $4419 AUD so I don’t see the RF 100-400 being that much cheaper, probably at least $2.5k AUD which would be more than double what the Tamron plus RF Adapter costs.

From what I’ve seen from your images along with others online, the Tamron performs like native on the R bodies and IQ looks great so I may be best off buying it while sales are still on...

Happy new year to you too!

Click to expand...

Would be better just to get the EF 100-400 II, since it's a native lens, better IQ and focusing than the third party tamrons and sigmas.

Click to expand...

That one is $2975 AUD then the adapter is around $160 AUD so if I spend that much I rather just wait for the RF 100-400 haha

Click to expand...

I'm confused, if someone owns an R6, pair it with a good lens..?

Click to expand...

Some people have a budget which means they can’t just buy any lens they like?

Click to expand...

Then why own a $2600 camera? Legitimately curious.

Click to expand...

I sold all my previous gear which paid for the Canon gear without anything out of pocket. The 85mm F/2 replaced two lenses as well which made the switch even easier.

Also this 100-400mm lens would be my least used and a niche lens so doesn’t make sense to spend that much on it, I’d be better off buying an 85mm f/1.2 which is similar in price and I’d use heaps.

Click to expand...

Then do that.

Only third party lens I haven't had issues with has been Sigma Art's, theirs and Tamrons zoom range has been garbage on the R cameras in my experience.

Click to expand...

Understood but that clearly is not my experience with this lens. I posted samples and there is this published review which I have found to be accurate.

https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamron-100-400mm-f4-5-6-3

Click to expand...

This review was very good and informative! The sales we had here weren’t anything special and I’m in no rush so I might just wait and see what this RF 100-400mm is like. Looking at how slow it is compared to previous lenses, hopefully it will be small and cheap.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a plan - best of luck and let us know how it ultimately works out!

Happy New Year - may 2021 be a better year for the world!

--
http://www.pkimages.com

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Agree with your reasoning and would add that sometimes there are other considerations. For me personally (just me not everyone), I find the RF 100-500 and the EF 100-400 II too heavy. So the Tamron works better for me. I own and use good Canon glass including the RF 24-105 f4 L and the EF 70-200 F4 IS - but for this purpose (animal “portraits” at the zoo) - this lens is a great fit.

Click to expand...

Yeah I have a bad back so size and weight is a consideration for me too.

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

If I was to buy this lens it would be for cityscapes so AF wouldn’t even be much of an issue but obviously if something had great AF that’s preferable. I get pretty bad G.A.S so that’s why I’m inclined to just wait and see what releases next year and what that RF 100-400 will be like.

Click to expand...

R2D2 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Agree with your reasoning and would add that sometimes there are other considerations. For me personally (just me not everyone), I find the RF 100-500 and the EF 100-400 II too heavy. So the Tamron works better for me. I own and use good Canon glass including the RF 24-105 f4 L and the EF 70-200 F4 IS - but for this purpose (animal “portraits” at the zoo) - this lens is a great fit.

Click to expand...

Yeah I have a bad back so size and weight is a consideration for me too.

Click to expand...

I feel for you guys too. I couldn't shoot with a telephoto for several years on account of my back! But I'm back this year .

Click to expand...

R2D2 said:

R2D2 said:

If I was to buy this lens it would be for cityscapes so AF wouldn’t even be much of an issue but obviously if something had great AF that’s preferable. I get pretty bad G.A.S so that’s why I’m inclined to just wait and see what releases next year and what that RF 100-400 will be like.

Click to expand...

I think the proposed RF 100-400 would be right up your alley (or the Sigma or Tamron right now).

Do realize however that the Canon 100-400 would not be a "mini" 100-500, and would be more along the lines of a 55-250 STM in quality (IMHO). Canon loves to maintain their market segmentation!

R2

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

I’ve been watching/reading a lot of reviews and I’m not very sold on the lens. I’ve actually ordered a third party tripod collar and the EF to R adapter which will both likely take months. Once they arrive I’ll wait for a good sale then likely get the Tamron

Click to expand...

TheVancouverGuy said:

Dlee13 said:

I’ve been watching/reading a lot of reviews and I’m not very sold on the lens. I’ve actually ordered a third party tripod collar and the EF to R adapter which will both likely take months. Once they arrive I’ll wait for a good sale then likely get the Tamron

Click to expand...

Probably better to go with a canon 100-400mm mark I. The Tamron focus slower.

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

TheVancouverGuy said:

Dlee13 said:

I’ve been watching/reading a lot of reviews and I’m not very sold on the lens. I’ve actually ordered a third party tripod collar and the EF to R adapter which will both likely take months. Once they arrive I’ll wait for a good sale then likely get the Tamron

Click to expand...

Probably better to go with a canon 100-400mm mark I. The Tamron focus slower.

Click to expand...

They appear to be discontinued here and stores only sell the II. If I was to go for a Canon 100-400mm I’d probably wait for the RF 100-400mm.

Click to expand...

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

TheVancouverGuy said:

Dlee13 said:

I’ve been watching/reading a lot of reviews and I’m not very sold on the lens. I’ve actually ordered a third party tripod collar and the EF to R adapter which will both likely take months. Once they arrive I’ll wait for a good sale then likely get the Tamron

Click to expand...

Probably better to go with a canon 100-400mm mark I. The Tamron focus slower.

Click to expand...

They appear to be discontinued here and stores only sell the II. If I was to go for a Canon 100-400mm I’d probably wait for the RF 100-400mm.

Click to expand...

Agree - by all accounts the version 1 (used) is not a good option and from my experience owning the Tamron, it focuses very fast so I don’t know where that statement is coming from!

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

TheVancouverGuy said:

Dlee13 said:

I’ve been watching/reading a lot of reviews and I’m not very sold on the lens. I’ve actually ordered a third party tripod collar and the EF to R adapter which will both likely take months. Once they arrive I’ll wait for a good sale then likely get the Tamron

Click to expand...

Probably better to go with a canon 100-400mm mark I. The Tamron focus slower.

Click to expand...

They appear to be discontinued here and stores only sell the II. If I was to go for a Canon 100-400mm I’d probably wait for the RF 100-400mm.

Click to expand...

Agree - by all accounts the version 1 (used) is not a good option and from my experience owning the Tamron, it focuses very fast so I don’t know where that statement is coming from!

Click to expand...

I think like many lenses when it first came out there may have been issues of copy variations, but the reviews much later after release seem really possible. Christopher Frosts review and Dustin Abbott’s were quite positive. As I’d use this lens for cityscapes, I found this one great too

https://www.lukecollinsphotography.com/tamron-100-400-lens-review/

Click to expand...

pkImages

Powered by SmugMug

www.pkimages.com

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

TheVancouverGuy said:

Dlee13 said:

I’ve been watching/reading a lot of reviews and I’m not very sold on the lens. I’ve actually ordered a third party tripod collar and the EF to R adapter which will both likely take months. Once they arrive I’ll wait for a good sale then likely get the Tamron

Click to expand...

Probably better to go with a canon 100-400mm mark I. The Tamron focus slower.

Click to expand...

They appear to be discontinued here and stores only sell the II. If I was to go for a Canon 100-400mm I’d probably wait for the RF 100-400mm.

Click to expand...

Agree - by all accounts the version 1 (used) is not a good option and from my experience owning the Tamron, it focuses very fast so I don’t know where that statement is coming from!

Click to expand...

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

TheVancouverGuy said:

Dlee13 said:

I’ve been watching/reading a lot of reviews and I’m not very sold on the lens. I’ve actually ordered a third party tripod collar and the EF to R adapter which will both likely take months. Once they arrive I’ll wait for a good sale then likely get the Tamron

Click to expand...

Probably better to go with a canon 100-400mm mark I. The Tamron focus slower.

Click to expand...

They appear to be discontinued here and stores only sell the II. If I was to go for a Canon 100-400mm I’d probably wait for the RF 100-400mm.

Click to expand...

Agree - by all accounts the version 1 (used) is not a good option and from my experience owning the Tamron, it focuses very fast so I don’t know where that statement is coming from!

Click to expand...

I think like many lenses when it first came out there may have been issues of copy variations, but the reviews much later after release seem really possible. Christopher Frosts review and Dustin Abbott’s were quite positive. As I’d use this lens for cityscapes, I found this one great too

https://www.lukecollinsphotography.com/tamron-100-400-lens-review/

Click to expand...

Thanks - love the review - it makes me want to go back to Yosemite. I have not been there in 10 years. Hopefully the world will heal and and we can start traveling again.

Your thinking with regard to the RF, EF Version II, and Tamron are spot on. BTW, the Tamron has "USD" focusing which is similar to Canon USM - very fast. Still, I will be interested in seeing the Canon RF offering (later this year?).

Meanwhile, here are two more samples from this past weekend with the Tamron.


R6 + Tamron 100-400


R6 + Tamron 100-400

--
http://www.pkimages.com

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

Yes it does look very nice! I could have gone there on my last trip but I only had 4 days in San Francisco so didn’t want to travel that far.

Thanks! Yeah I still think the upcoming RF would very likely be better AF wise and quite small, but it will also be more expensive and slower aperture wise. Looking at other RF lenses like the RF 85mm f/2, it’s $1000 AUD and I feel a 100-400 would be much more difficult to make so I would think it would be $2000 AUD at the least. Here renting isn’t an option and I’ve come to realize that I can always sell a lens second hand for the same price as renting so I can just get it anyways and if I want to switch later on I can just do that.

Click to expand...

Dlee13 said:

Excellent images! Are either at 400mm?

Click to expand...

pkImages

Powered by SmugMug

www.pkimages.com

pkoenig2001 said:

Dlee13 said:

Yes it does look very nice! I could have gone there on my last trip but I only had 4 days in San Francisco so didn’t want to travel that far.

Thanks! Yeah I still think the upcoming RF would very likely be better AF wise and quite small, but it will also be more expensive and slower aperture wise. Looking at other RF lenses like the RF 85mm f/2, it’s $1000 AUD and I feel a 100-400 would be much more difficult to make so I would think it would be $2000 AUD at the least. Here renting isn’t an option and I’ve come to realize that I can always sell a lens second hand for the same price as renting so I can just get it anyways and if I want to switch later on I can just do that.

Click to expand...

Agree, again.

pkoenig2001 said:

Excellent images! Are either at 400mm?

Click to expand...

Thanks. Neither of the previous two examples was at 400mm - here are two at 400mm.


R6 - Tamron 100-400 - 400mm


R6 - Tamron 100-400 - 400mm

Click to expand...