FInally. The review I have been looking for. Great technical in depth video. It's amazing how many people just give their own opinion on the lens and doesn't even (at least) show a picture at 50mm and 400mm to get a grasp of the tele capabilities.
Mine just arrived, it is surprisingly good. The reviews suggest it's only just.... adequate. I compared it to my lens that costs 5x at the same focal range and it seems marginally better (With A non moving subject). The corners at 400mm (wide open) are great!
I concur. I shot it and compared the images to my 70-180 and 28-75 G2. With similar focal lengths, the 50-400 is just as sharp as my other "pro" lenses and that is true even when shot wide open. My tests were with a borrowed lens. I just order mine too and looking to get it in the next few days.
I always assumed the 35-150 was meant to pair with the 150-500. If they release a ~ 12-35 (seems crazy but look what they’ve been doing) I would sell all my zooms and buy their trio
Thanks for yet another great review! I'm torn. I already have the Tamron 28-200 and the Sony 200-600. I'm very happy with both, but a part of me still wants this lens. Probably the best option for landscape combined with a wide angle lens, if you want to cover everything with two lenses. The 28-200, in my opinion, is the best one-lens option for multi day hikes where weight and size is prio. Such a versatile lens with its focal span and good IQ.
A few months ago, I borrowed the 50-400 and the 20-40 from Tamron. I went out to my local favorite spot for landscape work and got a lot of great images with both lenses. The two covered the range from 20-400 and the bonus is that I only have to have one set of 67 filters with me. I just bought the 50-400 and thinking about swapping my 17-28 with the 20-40. in the next few months. I will give the new 17-50 a try to see it is a better fit for my work.
@@boristahmasian9604 Nice! I actually bought the 50-400 some months ago. Couldn't resist it. Love it, but I won't sell my 28-200. It's just super nice when you want to go lightweight and still be able to shoot almost everything. Wish it was stabilised for those longer hand held shots though. Anyway, the 17-50 is on my radar too. That with the 50-400 and you're done.
@@edc641 I had the 28-200 on loan for a few weeks and loved it. You are right. It is so lightweight and versatile. Tamron is spoiling us with too many good lenses and causing a conundrum! I am seriously thinking of rearranging my Tamron holdings!! I had the 20-40 on loan too. Another crazy good lens. The 17-50 and the 50-400 would be nice combo. I might have a chance to try the 17-50 this weekend
@@boristahmasian9604 That's awesome. If you do get a chance to try it out, let us know what you think! I don't have anything wider than 28mm (28-75 + 28-200) atm, so I'm super interested in the 17-50.
Without a doubt, I would have bought this over the 100-400GM had it been available at the time. I don't use an A1/A9, nor do I use teleconverters, so the Sony protectionist limitations wouldn't be an issue. Great review for those in the market. Thanks.
Hi Dustin, another great detailed review.You get an automatic thumbs up before I even see the video because I know it is going to be great, as usual. I am thinking of letting my 70-300 and the 150-500 go in favor of this lens. The 50-400 and my 17-28 would make an excellent landscape package. Most of the images are shot between f9 and f11, anyway, so this lens should be just fine. I am happy with my 70-300. Not so much with the 150-500. The results are not consistent. I have shot it on a tripod too and barley getting sharp results. The 70-300 has been fantastic, even handheld. Thanks.
I think this lens competes in the circa 1kg lens group instead of 2kg lens group. By which I mean the usual 200-600, 150-600 super telephoto zooms aren't really its target market. 1kg only gives you options like 100-400 f6.3 If you look at it this way, you will find this lens even more standing out in terms of IQ and versatility.
Thanks for all your very informative and educational videos! I have learned so much and you have helped me immensely to decide which gear to get! So, now I am trying to make a decision concerning telephoto lenses. From your vids I get the impression that when comparing Sigma 100-400 and Tamron 50-400 the best stabilization system goes to Sigma 100-400, unless it's just the shooting conditions that change dramatically. As for the aperture change on the various focal lengths, the Sigma 100-400mm only offers its maximum f5 between 100 and 113mm, closing to f5. 6 between 113 and 235mm, after which it's f6.3. On the other hand the aperture change of Tamron 50-400 is as follows: a)50-60mm = f/4.5, b) 61-83mm = f/5.0, c) 84-150mm = f/5.6 and d) 151-400mm = f/6.3 which is much slower in a vast focal range when compared to the Sigma lens. As for the AF, I don't know if the software uprade of Tamron 50-400 improved it so much to reach the levels of the Sigma lens. So all we have for the Tamron is a better focal range with very good sharpness at 50mm and the micro capabilities, all these at a higher price than the Sigma (approximately 500 euros). And now we have the option of for more budget lenses the Tamron 50-300 which is excellent in the middle of the frame but the image quality of the corners is not consistent, however the cost and the weight is very good. So the question is, does optically the Sigma 100-400 is better when compared to the Tamrons? How much difference can it make in Sony a7iii and Sony a7 R III?
Thanks for sharing. I've been thinking of buying either a 2nd hand Sony 100-400 or a Tamron 50-400 that just isn't available 2d hand so I'll buy it new. I hate Tamron somehow listing this lens at 1450 euros in Belgium and my country The Netherlands. It costs 1250 euros in Germany. So next weekend, we'll probably do a weekend trip to Köln, Germany to buy this lens. 160km drive one way but fuel is much cheaper in Germany too.
Thank you for creating such wonderful review. I have been thinking between this lens and the 150-500mm and still deciding. would be nice to see a comparison review between these two lenses.
Same. I'm conflicted between the two. 150-500 is superior of the two, but the thing is "The best lens is the one you can carry". I'm just not sure if I'll carry the 150-500mm as much as I'll this multipurpose, very flexible and easy to carry lens
@@rickt.8866 I ended up with the 50-400mm and ABSOLUTELY no regrade! I have the 100-400mm in Fuji X-mount (APSC 150-600mm) so I have an idea what a 150-500mm would be on the full frame. The flexibility for events like concerts or Christmas parades to be able to zoom out to 50mm was amazing while getting 1:2 macro at distance that is closer than the lens hood itself…. WoW! Great lens.
Such a great grab and go lens. Low key stealth, never gets attention in public. Any sight seeling outing or road trip this goes with me on the ready. It's always obvious if I want to use this or the 200-600. They overlap in range but not use cases or what they're good at for me. Thank you very much for this review.
thank for all your hard work!!! based on your reviews I purchased an Sony a73..this lens..Tamron 20-40 and Tamron 28-75 G2.... again thank you for all your help!!!
Absolutely amazing focal range and performance! I went from looking to buy "the trifecta", was a bit swayed by your Tamron 28-200 reviews and now found this 50-400 which is a much, much more useful range for me. I wanted the 2.8 zooms for shooting the occasional concert or low-light street photography but I think I can do those shots with a pair of cheap primes and not suffer too much. The Sigma 60-600 is cool but it's way too big and heavy to lug around - even heavier than my 150-600mm that I use for birding. But this Tamron can easily cover at least 80% of all my shots. And it's on a pretty good sale currently. As someone that has last used a wide-range zoom almost fifteen years ago, I'm absolutely blown away by the performance of these new zooms from Tamron. Edit: On the other hand, if I get the 35-150 2-2.8 instead, I won't need any additional prime lenses, it will be perfect for concerts with the only downside that I'll have to carry my 150-600 Sigma with me for all shots longer than 150 when I'm outside. Hmm, I need to sleep on that. It would still make for a great 2-lens-only kit.
Thanks for your definitive review Dustin....I have been doing a ton of research and now opted for this lens.... mentioned your channel at my camera club last night 👍
I was pretty set on Sigma 60-600mm but the size, lightweight, and price makes this Tamron highly compelling. 400mm is good for 85% of what I'd shoot. It fits in my backpack easily. Choices choices.
A few months ago, I got a loaner 50-400 from Tamron to try. After testing the lens for a few weeks, I have a bunch of fantastically sharp and contrasty images. This is true of the lens all focal lengths and all apertures. It is a very sharp lens and the range is fantastic. I will be letting my 150-500 and 70-300 go in favor of this lens. I had an issue with the 150-500 and sent it to Tamron for them to check it out. Shout out to Tamron warranty service. They sent back a perfect lens. However, the 150-500 is still heavy and takes a much bigger filter. My 67mm filter set is good for all my Tamron lenses now. I picked up a 50-400 today and looking forward to doing my next project with it. The 1:2 macro on the short end is a nice bonus and surprise. At mid focal range , it is still a 1:3 macro which is useful for a bunch of image making situations.
Great review Dustin. I am in a process of deciding between Sigma 100-400mm and Tamron 50-400, having currently both side by side. With Sigma being almost 50% of price of the Tamron, Tamron still wins. Tamron is much sharper from 300-400mm than Sigma on my A7r4. Even handheld. I am not a big fan of Tamron stabilization, in the viewfinder and on the sensor Sigma performs much better. I can get sharp image on Sigma even below 1/15, while Tamron needs to be above 1/30 s. On sideline, I'm going through the second copy of Sigma. The first one was much worse at the long end. For me, Tamron's custom button placement being flush with the barrel is much easier to use then Sigma's placement on the raised switch module. I found customization of the switches sort of interesting option but in real life not practical. For instance, you can customize the button to work as on-off AF switch as custom1 and set your distance limiter as custom2, but you cannot have them working at the same time. You have to change the custom switch to any of these positions to invoke different functions. Tamron should add choice at least two functions on single custom setup. But at the end this is very versatile, well built and overall great lens for good lighting conditions.
Ngl I am tempted by this lens. Its literally for those who need zoom range but not sure what they will do with it. Buying something like 100-400 gm makes you commited to the range while this one can always be used as 50-100 type of lens
Thanks for a great review. I currently have Tamron 28-200 and thinking of moving to Tamron 50-400. What do you think about the image quality of Tamron 50-400 compared to Tamron 28-200 mm? Do you recommend 50-400 mm over the 28-200 mm?
Awesome review Dustin! This is the first telephoto lens I have and am used to shooting 24-50mm prime lenses. One of the biggest downsides I've noticed is desaturated colors when zooming in past 200mm outdoors. Is this a common thing with zoom lenses? I understand the atmospheric effects you mention, but was surprised on the colors
Wasn't expecting it to be such a great lens. May sell my 100 to 400 gm for this lens to gain that extra 50mm and the much better minimum focusing distance.
@@MrPetebuster1 I am especially interested in the lower light performance as the aperture transition points on the 150-500 are excellent. Curious if 1 VR provides better low-light performance over the other. Leaning to the 50-400 due to the extra features and 67mm.
@@cohoonatube Yes leaning that way myself already have the 200-600 and thats certainly not a take everywhere lens , this would be , with the A7RIV the cropping capabilities can make up for the reach
Thank you for the detailed review. I feel this lens will be a knockout for the X mount. Coupled with the 17-70 it would make a great set for outdoor sports events and zoos. While I can use the Viltrox 75 for indoor events alongside the 17-70. Let's hope they bring it to the Fuji system. Love the size and weight for this feature set.
Thank you much. 1st time w/you but about to go with Sony system and sell my beautiful Fuji system. This really helps decision. TKS Will subscribe to channel.
You should do a Sigma 100 400 comparaison since you have the Sigma. I did compare them on a far distance and found the Sigma sharper on all focals even in the center! Maybe it is my Tamron copy. Very sharp at 50 and going less and less until 400. I still don't know the one to keep. The real upside of Tamron for me is the macro capability at 50mm
Hi Dustin. Always love your detailed reviews. I was deciding between the Tamaron 70-200 f 2.8 and 50-400. My question is that if we choose the same f stop for both of these let’s say 6.3, does one of these lenses have better stabilization hand-held compared to the other? I mainly do cityscapes and not wildlife but would love the telephoto reach for capturing distant objects mostly during sunrises/sunsets.
I'm not sure which 70-200 you are referring to, as Tamron doesn't have a 70-200 on E-mount (which this lens is for). Assuming you are talking about the 70-180 G2, I would say that the two lenses are about the same when it comes to stabilization.
so for reletively the same price (+- $100), the best all-around lens is? (cityscapes, landscapes, historic architecture, minimal wildlife on a a6500, maybe stepping up to the a7 range) • Tamron 50-400mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD • Tamron 150-500mm F/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD • Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | S
If you are doing minimal wildlife and shooting on an APS-c body, I would say the 50 to 400 is the best choice for you. Having access to the wider focal length will be more important than having access to the longer focal lengths
I would definitely count in to your decision process the weight differences between Tamron 50-400 on one side and 150-600s on the other. From my own experience, it's significantly difference.
Dustin, if ignore the versatility of this lens, and ignore price, only consider image quality of them, which one you would buy? Tamron 50-400 or sigma 100-400 dgdn? Thanks
I would still lean towards the Tamron for two reasons: 1) the Tamron focus motor is faster and 2) that extra 50mm on the wide end does really add to what you can do.
Currently have the 150-500 for the past year and I am thinking about trading in for the 50-400. The 150-500 is incredibly heavy. It’s starting to wear on me when holding and in my bag.
Does the Zeiss Batis APO Sonnar 2.8/135 make more sens than the Tamron 70-180mm 2.8? It would slot between my Sony 85mm 1.8, and on the other end, would probably go with the Sony 200-600mm 5.6-6.3G OSS. The advantages of the Batis being, APO design, outstanding sharpness, reasonable used prices, OSS, less weight, better build quality, while also keeping 1:5 close up capabilities.
I own the 70-180 and it is probably the sharpest lens I own. I marvel at the quality of images I get from this lens. I have zero hesitation using it for client work and extremely high quality image making. I have seen them around $800 used which is a bargain price for the quality. Tamron had a $200 rebate few months ago which I took advantage of. I have shot Canon L and Nikon VR lenses of similar focal length and this Tamron is even better than those lenses.
Hello Dustin, Great review a expected! Would like to know how this lens performs compared to 70 -350 paired with a A6400 body as a walk around zoom lens! ( I have tried Sigma 100-400 and was not comfortable with the balance and the weight) Thanks in advance!
That's not an application I've tested, but the Tamron actually weighs a little bit more than the Sigma, so I doubt that you would find it a better balance. The 70-350 is probably a better option if you are looking for walkaround weight and balance on an a6400
Where I’m struggling is the 100400GM used is about $1500. I can get the Tamron 50400 for $900. Really tough choice with my primary concern being EQ. Any recommendations out there? Wish there was a side by side of the image charts
@@DustinAbbottTWI appreciate the feedback. Helps confirm what I was feeling towards the review. Where that 50mm helps out is family hikes. Sometimes my toddler is really close to me where I’ll need something like a 50mm, but still want the 400mm for reach with birds or wildlife. I switched from Canon and find myself missing their sharp RF 100-500mm at times. Just ordered the Tamron 👍
I just bought an a6400 last night to replace my broken a6000 and I really want this lens maybe I can trade my sigma 100 to 400 in for some trade in credit
I may be upgrading my camera to the higher megapixel R series. Would the 50-400 still be a good choice or would the higher MP exaggerate its weaknesses vs the Sony 100-400 GM.
Hi Roberto, that would really depend on what kind of photography you're doing. For travel, I like the 28-200 for the versatility. For actual telephoto work, this 50-400mm is more useful.
It seems like it would prevent you from needing to take extra lenses but most of the shots people want to take at 50 mm they are wanting a soft background and subject separation and wide aperture. Still a very nice lens. I don't think anything beats my incredibly lightweight and inexpensive and enjoyable to carry rf100-400mm. I bet it and the RF50mm 1.8 both together weigh less and cost less than this lens lol.
@@jeffbronson3696 yes I have that lens for my Sony A7iv and I really like it. That RF lens is on my r7. I just got an ef300 mm 2.8 big beautiful Prime that will adapt to both cameras very well.
Because Tamron designed that USB-C port to be fully weather sealed. It's gasketed to make sure there is no water intrusion...much like what is the case on many modern phones.
Hello, Dustin. In terms of sharpness, contrast, and bokeh… would you say that the Tamron is worth the extra money over the Sigma? Let’s assume we’re comparing them only within the 100-400 focal lengths.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for replying. I have the 28-75 Tammy and the 55mm Zeiss… so I’m wondering which lens would be a better choice to compliment my current set of lenses. The Zeiss is hardly ever on my camera, but I’m keeping it simply because I feel Sony/Zeiss won’t produce them anymore in the future. If the 50-400 is a better performer optically, then I’d rather pick it over the Sigma, despite the price difference. But then again, will the difference be noticeable on Sony a7m3 or m4 bodies?
Unless you do a lot of hand-held video shots at 400mm, I don't think it's an issue. If you are doing photography only, the shake doesn't affect the final image output
@@chanjeff4406 I mostly do video and those shakes show in the video. I use mode 3 (erratic movement) in the 200-600mm Sony while on a fluid head and it's extremely smooth while panning. IBIS alone isn't enough at these focal lengths and you need a proper optical stabilization as well. Many say that you should turn off both IBIS and optical stabilizatin while on a tripod and that's the worst advice ever.
@@chanjeff4406 Hope this feedback helps. Maybe I should check another review as this lens rivals 35-150mm for semi-wide, telephoto, and macro in one! Warm regards.
I was going to buy the Sigma 100-400, but now I’d rather save some more and go for this one. I think it’s a perfect companion to my Sony 16-35.
FInally. The review I have been looking for. Great technical in depth video. It's amazing how many people just give their own opinion on the lens and doesn't even (at least) show a picture at 50mm and 400mm to get a grasp of the tele capabilities.
LOL - it's true.
Right? So many lens reviews are just like "it's pretty good" or "it's amazing" and then show no examples of what that means in reality. 😅
Mine just arrived, it is surprisingly good. The reviews suggest it's only just.... adequate.
I compared it to my lens that costs 5x at the same focal range and it seems marginally better (With A non moving subject). The corners at 400mm (wide open) are great!
I concur. I shot it and compared the images to my 70-180 and 28-75 G2. With similar focal lengths, the 50-400 is just as sharp as my other "pro" lenses and that is true even when shot wide open. My tests were with a borrowed lens. I just order mine too and looking to get it in the next few days.
The Tamron 35-150 and this 50-400 are an amazing zoom kit for Sony. Pair them with whatever prime lens that's your favorite and you can do anything.
True enough
I always assumed the 35-150 was meant to pair with the 150-500. If they release a ~ 12-35 (seems crazy but look what they’ve been doing) I would sell all my zooms and buy their trio
@@stlflyboy86Tamron likes “5” so there will be 15-35 35-150 150-500. Or existing 20-40 is already wide zoom that Tamron had in mind?
Thanks for yet another great review! I'm torn. I already have the Tamron 28-200 and the Sony 200-600. I'm very happy with both, but a part of me still wants this lens. Probably the best option for landscape combined with a wide angle lens, if you want to cover everything with two lenses. The 28-200, in my opinion, is the best one-lens option for multi day hikes where weight and size is prio. Such a versatile lens with its focal span and good IQ.
The 28-200 is a favorite of mine for the situation you describes.
A few months ago, I borrowed the 50-400 and the 20-40 from Tamron. I went out to my local favorite spot for landscape work and got a lot of great images with both lenses. The two covered the range from 20-400 and the bonus is that I only have to have one set of 67 filters with me.
I just bought the 50-400 and thinking about swapping my 17-28 with the 20-40. in the next few months. I will give the new 17-50 a try to see it is a better fit for my work.
@@boristahmasian9604 Nice! I actually bought the 50-400 some months ago. Couldn't resist it. Love it, but I won't sell my 28-200. It's just super nice when you want to go lightweight and still be able to shoot almost everything. Wish it was stabilised for those longer hand held shots though. Anyway, the 17-50 is on my radar too. That with the 50-400 and you're done.
@@edc641 I had the 28-200 on loan for a few weeks and loved it. You are right. It is so lightweight and versatile. Tamron is spoiling us with too many good lenses and causing a conundrum! I am seriously thinking of rearranging my Tamron holdings!! I had the 20-40 on loan too. Another crazy good lens.
The 17-50 and the 50-400 would be nice combo. I might have a chance to try the 17-50 this weekend
@@boristahmasian9604 That's awesome. If you do get a chance to try it out, let us know what you think! I don't have anything wider than 28mm (28-75 + 28-200) atm, so I'm super interested in the 17-50.
Thank for a great review. I prefer this lens over 100-400 GM because range and weight of it.
Both fair points.
Another awesome honest and comprehensive review. Much appreciated!
Glad it was helpful!
Without a doubt, I would have bought this over the 100-400GM had it been available at the time. I don't use an A1/A9, nor do I use teleconverters, so the Sony protectionist limitations wouldn't be an issue. Great review for those in the market. Thanks.
You're welcome.
Hi Dustin, another great detailed review.You get an automatic thumbs up before I even see the video because I know it is going to be great, as usual.
I am thinking of letting my 70-300 and the 150-500 go in favor of this lens. The 50-400 and my 17-28 would make an excellent landscape package. Most of the images are shot between f9 and f11, anyway, so this lens should be just fine. I am happy with my 70-300. Not so much with the 150-500. The results are not consistent. I have shot it on a tripod too and barley getting sharp results. The 70-300 has been fantastic, even handheld. Thanks.
Sounds like this would be a good lens for your purpose.
I think this lens competes in the circa 1kg lens group instead of 2kg lens group. By which I mean the usual 200-600, 150-600 super telephoto zooms aren't really its target market. 1kg only gives you options like 100-400 f6.3 If you look at it this way, you will find this lens even more standing out in terms of IQ and versatility.
That's exactly right, Frank
Thanks for all your very informative and educational videos! I have learned so much and you have helped me immensely to decide which gear to get! So, now I am trying to make a decision concerning telephoto lenses. From your vids I get the impression that when comparing Sigma 100-400 and Tamron 50-400 the best stabilization system goes to Sigma 100-400, unless it's just the shooting conditions that change dramatically. As for the aperture change on the various focal lengths, the Sigma 100-400mm only offers its maximum f5 between 100 and 113mm, closing to f5. 6 between 113 and 235mm, after which it's f6.3. On the other hand the aperture change of Tamron 50-400 is as follows: a)50-60mm = f/4.5, b) 61-83mm = f/5.0, c) 84-150mm = f/5.6 and d) 151-400mm = f/6.3 which is much slower in a vast focal range when compared to the Sigma lens. As for the AF, I don't know if the software uprade of Tamron 50-400 improved it so much to reach the levels of the Sigma lens. So all we have for the Tamron is a better focal range with very good sharpness at 50mm and the micro capabilities, all these at a higher price than the Sigma (approximately 500 euros). And now we have the option of for more budget lenses the Tamron 50-300 which is excellent in the middle of the frame but the image quality of the corners is not consistent, however the cost and the weight is very good. So the question is, does optically the Sigma 100-400 is better when compared to the Tamrons? How much difference can it make in Sony a7iii and Sony a7 R III?
If I were buying right now, the Tamron 50-400mm is the lens I'd buy.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you
That autofocus cuteness is out of this world!
LOL :)
Thanks for sharing. I've been thinking of buying either a 2nd hand Sony 100-400 or a Tamron 50-400 that just isn't available 2d hand so I'll buy it new. I hate Tamron somehow listing this lens at 1450 euros in Belgium and my country The Netherlands. It costs 1250 euros in Germany. So next weekend, we'll probably do a weekend trip to Köln, Germany to buy this lens. 160km drive one way but fuel is much cheaper in Germany too.
Thank you for creating such wonderful review. I have been thinking between this lens and the 150-500mm and still deciding. would be nice to see a comparison review between these two lenses.
Glad it was helpful!
Same. I'm conflicted between the two. 150-500 is superior of the two, but the thing is "The best lens is the one you can carry". I'm just not sure if I'll carry the 150-500mm as much as I'll this multipurpose, very flexible and easy to carry lens
Had the Tamron 150-500 and it was stellar for the price but too heavy and large. This new 50-400 is perfect for my needs.
@@rickt.8866 I ended up with the 50-400mm and ABSOLUTELY no regrade! I have the 100-400mm in Fuji X-mount (APSC 150-600mm) so I have an idea what a 150-500mm would be on the full frame. The flexibility for events like concerts or Christmas parades to be able to zoom out to 50mm was amazing while getting 1:2 macro at distance that is closer than the lens hood itself…. WoW! Great lens.
Your review is really well done and informative. It has been a great help. Thank you!
Such a great grab and go lens. Low key stealth, never gets attention in public. Any sight seeling outing or road trip this goes with me on the ready. It's always obvious if I want to use this or the 200-600. They overlap in range but not use cases or what they're good at for me. Thank you very much for this review.
It is a very versatile lens.
thank for all your hard work!!! based on your reviews I purchased an Sony a73..this lens..Tamron 20-40 and Tamron 28-75 G2.... again thank you for all your help!!!
You're welcome.
Absolutely amazing focal range and performance! I went from looking to buy "the trifecta", was a bit swayed by your Tamron 28-200 reviews and now found this 50-400 which is a much, much more useful range for me. I wanted the 2.8 zooms for shooting the occasional concert or low-light street photography but I think I can do those shots with a pair of cheap primes and not suffer too much. The Sigma 60-600 is cool but it's way too big and heavy to lug around - even heavier than my 150-600mm that I use for birding. But this Tamron can easily cover at least 80% of all my shots. And it's on a pretty good sale currently. As someone that has last used a wide-range zoom almost fifteen years ago, I'm absolutely blown away by the performance of these new zooms from Tamron.
Edit: On the other hand, if I get the 35-150 2-2.8 instead, I won't need any additional prime lenses, it will be perfect for concerts with the only downside that I'll have to carry my 150-600 Sigma with me for all shots longer than 150 when I'm outside. Hmm, I need to sleep on that. It would still make for a great 2-lens-only kit.
There are so many difficult buying decisions these days because there are so many great lenses.
Thanks for your definitive review Dustin....I have been doing a ton of research and now opted for this lens.... mentioned your channel at my camera club last night 👍
Thanks for the shout out.
@@DustinAbbottTWI your welcome Dustin..,your reviews are great 👍
I was pretty set on Sigma 60-600mm but the size, lightweight, and price makes this Tamron highly compelling. 400mm is good for 85% of what I'd shoot. It fits in my backpack easily. Choices choices.
Exactly.
A few months ago, I got a loaner 50-400 from Tamron to try. After testing the lens for a few weeks, I have a bunch of fantastically sharp and contrasty images. This is true of the lens all focal lengths and all apertures. It is a very sharp lens and the range is fantastic. I will be letting my 150-500 and 70-300 go in favor of this lens. I had an issue with the 150-500 and sent it to Tamron for them to check it out. Shout out to Tamron warranty service. They sent back a perfect lens. However, the 150-500 is still heavy and takes a much bigger filter. My 67mm filter set is good for all my Tamron lenses now. I picked up a 50-400 today and looking forward to doing my next project with it. The 1:2 macro on the short end is a nice bonus and surprise. At mid focal range , it is still a 1:3 macro which is useful for a bunch of image making situations.
It's a strong value lens, for sure.
Excellent review. Your comments on the lens are very compelling, but I also enjoyed your photographs.
I appreciate it, Christopher.
Would love to see you do a side by side with the tamron 150-500 Dustin great review as always.🙂
Great review Dustin. I am in a process of deciding between Sigma 100-400mm and Tamron 50-400, having currently both side by side. With Sigma being almost 50% of price of the Tamron, Tamron still wins. Tamron is much sharper from 300-400mm than Sigma on my A7r4. Even handheld. I am not a big fan of Tamron stabilization, in the viewfinder and on the sensor Sigma performs much better. I can get sharp image on Sigma even below 1/15, while Tamron needs to be above 1/30 s. On sideline, I'm going through the second copy of Sigma. The first one was much worse at the long end. For me, Tamron's custom button placement being flush with the barrel is much easier to use then Sigma's placement on the raised switch module. I found customization of the switches sort of interesting option but in real life not practical. For instance, you can customize the button to work as on-off AF switch as custom1 and set your distance limiter as custom2, but you cannot have them working at the same time. You have to change the custom switch to any of these positions to invoke different functions. Tamron should add choice at least two functions on single custom setup.
But at the end this is very versatile, well built and overall great lens for good lighting conditions.
I'm glad you are enjoying it. It's a very nice lens.
Ngl I am tempted by this lens. Its literally for those who need zoom range but not sure what they will do with it. Buying something like 100-400 gm makes you commited to the range while this one can always be used as 50-100 type of lens
That's fair.
Thanks for a great review. I currently have Tamron 28-200 and thinking of moving to Tamron 50-400. What do you think about the image quality of Tamron 50-400 compared to Tamron 28-200 mm? Do you recommend 50-400 mm over the 28-200 mm?
Awesome review Dustin! This is the first telephoto lens I have and am used to shooting 24-50mm prime lenses. One of the biggest downsides I've noticed is desaturated colors when zooming in past 200mm outdoors. Is this a common thing with zoom lenses? I understand the atmospheric effects you mention, but was surprised on the colors
Hmmm, I wouldn't say that's common.
Wasn't expecting it to be such a great lens. May sell my 100 to 400 gm for this lens to gain that extra 50mm and the much better minimum focusing distance.
It is surprisingly strong, for sure.
When you write this I wonder if I should just buy. I am really not sure if 1k+ worth for gm
Are you fine with your new tamron? Or regret to sell the sony gm?
Stellar review as always Dustin, Thanks! Trying to decide between this and the 150-500. Would love to see a shootout :D.
Same here, 150-500 weighs nearly as much as the 200-600 but you have the extra reach and its cheaper
@@MrPetebuster1 I am especially interested in the lower light performance as the aperture transition points on the 150-500 are excellent. Curious if 1 VR provides better low-light performance over the other. Leaning to the 50-400 due to the extra features and 67mm.
+1 : Especially an autofocus comparison between this and the 150-500 would be very helpful for me.
@@cohoonatube Yes leaning that way myself already have the 200-600 and thats certainly not a take everywhere lens , this would be , with the A7RIV the cropping capabilities can make up for the reach
@@MrPetebuster1 Yep ... even with the A7IV's 33mp :D.
Thanks for the detailed review
My pleasure.
Outstanding review, thank you
You're welcome.
Would be a great travel lens, add a 16-35 or wide prime.
Definitely
Thank you for the detailed review. I feel this lens will be a knockout for the X mount. Coupled with the 17-70 it would make a great set for outdoor sports events and zoos. While I can use the Viltrox 75 for indoor events alongside the 17-70. Let's hope they bring it to the Fuji system. Love the size and weight for this feature set.
You're right - it would be a nice addition over there.
The Signa 56mm 1.4 could be an option, too.
Thank you much. 1st time w/you but about to go with Sony system and sell my beautiful Fuji system. This really helps decision. TKS Will subscribe to channel.
Thanks for the sub and I'm glad that my review helped.
Thanks for your reviews and work..im going to purchase an a73. Just concerned about the weight
.also considering tamron 35 to 150
The weight of the lens, or the camera? There isn’t a lot of difference in weight between the two lenses you’ve mentioned here.
I didn't expect such a stellar IQ from this lens. Normally lenses with an 8x zoom ratio suffer a lot in IQ, but not this one!
Exactly. Tamron has developed a knack for optimizing bigger zoom ranges.
I hope this is made for Z Mount
The puppies got you a like!
Yay for the puppies!
Hoping Tamron will make 50-500 lens in the near future.
That would be nice, though it might cannibalize their 150-500mm sales.
@@DustinAbbottTWI50-600 then to avoid clashing those numbers. Haha!
You should do a Sigma 100 400 comparaison since you have the Sigma. I did compare them on a far distance and found the Sigma sharper on all focals even in the center! Maybe it is my Tamron copy. Very sharp at 50 and going less and less until 400. I still don't know the one to keep. The real upside of Tamron for me is the macro capability at 50mm
I don't actually have the Sigma anymore. I sold it when I bought the Sony 200-600mm
a suprisingly good lens ，tamron do improved alot these years
They definitely have
Were the video shots you showed when mentioning the VC handheld or on a tripod?
Those 0.5X at 50mm and 0.25X at 400 is very useful when traveling and you wanna get close up shot on flowers.
Absolutely.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I think this lens is more compelling than Sigma 60-600 DN.
Hi Dustin. Always love your detailed reviews. I was deciding between the Tamaron 70-200 f 2.8 and 50-400. My question is that if we choose the same f stop for both of these let’s say 6.3, does one of these lenses have better stabilization hand-held compared to the other? I mainly do cityscapes and not wildlife but would love the telephoto reach for capturing distant objects mostly during sunrises/sunsets.
I'm not sure which 70-200 you are referring to, as Tamron doesn't have a 70-200 on E-mount (which this lens is for). Assuming you are talking about the 70-180 G2, I would say that the two lenses are about the same when it comes to stabilization.
so for reletively the same price (+- $100), the best all-around lens is?
(cityscapes, landscapes, historic architecture, minimal wildlife on a a6500, maybe stepping up to the a7 range)
• Tamron 50-400mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD
• Tamron 150-500mm F/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD
• Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | S
If you are doing minimal wildlife and shooting on an APS-c body, I would say the 50 to 400 is the best choice for you. Having access to the wider focal length will be more important than having access to the longer focal lengths
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you for the reply.
I would definitely count in to your decision process the weight differences between Tamron 50-400 on one side and 150-600s on the other. From my own experience, it's significantly difference.
I'd be curious to compare this to the Sigma 50-500 or 60-600 :)
The weight saving of Tamron is the deciding factor for most people.
You are really talking about a completley different class of lens in terms of size and weight.
Dustin, if ignore the versatility of this lens, and ignore price, only consider image quality of them, which one you would buy? Tamron 50-400 or sigma 100-400 dgdn? Thanks
I would still lean towards the Tamron for two reasons: 1) the Tamron focus motor is faster and 2) that extra 50mm on the wide end does really add to what you can do.
Thanks!
No problem!
Love review as always. Too bad no model for old Canon T7. What Sony mirror less model would you suggest for travel?
If you can afford the a7IV, it's a really well-rounded camera.
Still tempted between the 50-400 and the 150-500. yes, the weight… but extra 100mm and more light coming in because aperture stays longer open…
That's a fair conundrum, for sure.
@@DustinAbbottTWI went for the 150-500
Currently have the 150-500 for the past year and I am thinking about trading in for the 50-400. The 150-500 is incredibly heavy. It’s starting to wear on me when holding and in my bag.
On my wish list 🙂
It's a very nice lens.
Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 coming on January 12. Also, Tamron 150-400mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III VC VXD coming soon.
I'm usually pretty well informed about such things ;) I can say no more.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I’m excited for your upcoming reviews for 2023!
Do manufacturers see the lens' MTF chart limitations and let them slide…if so, why on deluxe models?
Does the Zeiss Batis APO Sonnar 2.8/135 make more sens than the Tamron 70-180mm 2.8?
It would slot between my Sony 85mm 1.8, and on the other end, would probably go with the Sony 200-600mm 5.6-6.3G OSS.
The advantages of the Batis being, APO design, outstanding sharpness, reasonable used prices, OSS, less weight, better build quality, while also keeping 1:5 close up capabilities.
I own the 70-180 and it is probably the sharpest lens I own. I marvel at the quality of images I get from this lens. I have zero hesitation using it for client work and extremely high quality image making. I have seen them around $800 used which is a bargain price for the quality. Tamron had a $200 rebate few months ago which I took advantage of. I have shot Canon L and Nikon VR lenses of similar focal length and this Tamron is even better than those lenses.
The Batis is a nice lens, though the Tamron definitely trumps it for versatility.
Hello Dustin, Great review a expected! Would like to know how this lens performs compared to 70 -350 paired with a A6400 body as a walk around zoom lens! ( I have tried Sigma 100-400 and was not comfortable with the balance and the weight) Thanks in advance!
That's not an application I've tested, but the Tamron actually weighs a little bit more than the Sigma, so I doubt that you would find it a better balance. The 70-350 is probably a better option if you are looking for walkaround weight and balance on an a6400
Where I’m struggling is the 100400GM used is about $1500. I can get the Tamron 50400 for $900. Really tough choice with my primary concern being EQ. Any recommendations out there? Wish there was a side by side of the image charts
I think I'd lean towards the Tamron, myself, unless you need to use TCs. The GM is getting a little older at this point.
@@DustinAbbottTWI appreciate the feedback. Helps confirm what I was feeling towards the review. Where that 50mm helps out is family hikes. Sometimes my toddler is really close to me where I’ll need something like a 50mm, but still want the 400mm for reach with birds or wildlife. I switched from Canon and find myself missing their sharp RF 100-500mm at times. Just ordered the Tamron 👍
I prefer compare to tokina 80-400 mm or Nikon 80-400 mm too
I'm afraid I don't test on Nikon. Sorry
I just bought an a6400 last night to replace my broken a6000 and I really want this lens maybe I can trade my sigma 100 to 400 in for some trade in credit
Or sell it on the used market.
There are 2 stabilization modes. What is the difference between them, when each of them should be used?
Mode 2 should be used for panning situations where you want to remove one axis of stabilzation.
I may be upgrading my camera to the higher megapixel R series. Would the 50-400 still be a good choice or would the higher MP exaggerate its weaknesses vs the Sony 100-400 GM.
I did my tests on the 50MP Alpha 1, so there isn’t a huge difference with the 61 MP sensor. You can apply my results to see if it fits your needs.
Seems to be a winner lens. Will give it a look. Thank you.
Good luck!
How does this lens compare to the Tamron 28-200? Which would you rather have?
Greetings from the Netherlands
Hi Roberto, that would really depend on what kind of photography you're doing. For travel, I like the 28-200 for the versatility. For actual telephoto work, this 50-400mm is more useful.
It seems like it would prevent you from needing to take extra lenses but most of the shots people want to take at 50 mm they are wanting a soft background and subject separation and wide aperture. Still a very nice lens. I don't think anything beats my incredibly lightweight and inexpensive and enjoyable to carry rf100-400mm. I bet it and the RF50mm 1.8 both together weigh less and cost less than this lens lol.
The Tammy 70-300 for E mount is even lighter and cheaper, albeit doesn’t reach quite as far
@@jeffbronson3696 yes I have that lens for my Sony A7iv and I really like it. That RF lens is on my r7. I just got an ef300 mm 2.8 big beautiful Prime that will adapt to both cameras very well.
The RF 100-400 is just not in the same class as this lens optically. At all.
@@DustinAbbottTWI you mean better or worse, I am out of loop in this one
@@Donbros The Tamron is far better
Great review! What is the name of the tripod you are using in the video?
Oben Tabletop Tripod shown in video: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks 😊
This versus the Sony 70 - 350 for sharpness and stabilization?
I didn't test this lens on APS-C, so I can't say. I would be surprised if it beats the Sony, though, as that lens is very strong.
Ultimate crash zoom lens
I'm not sure I understand this reference.
@@DustinAbbottTWI i refered doimg video "crash zooms" more notably like in some Quentin Tarantino movies
As always: If you want a decent review, tune in to Dustin!
Would be great to see this compared to the sigma 100-400.
Unfortunately I don't have the Sigma on hand.
How can you say it's weather sealed, when it has a open USB port on it ?
Because Tamron designed that USB-C port to be fully weather sealed. It's gasketed to make sure there is no water intrusion...much like what is the case on many modern phones.
Hi can you compare this for 70-180 vs 50-400?
I'm afraid not. I don't have either lens on hand anymore.
Is there any way to manualy set the distance to the subject? For instance I want to record video with birds which will fly 10 feet away.
I would think you could just set your focus point manually and then leave AF off.
Hello, Dustin. In terms of sharpness, contrast, and bokeh… would you say that the Tamron is worth the extra money over the Sigma? Let’s assume we’re comparing them only within the 100-400 focal lengths.
I personally think it is, but I find that extra 50mm extremely valuable.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for replying. I have the 28-75 Tammy and the 55mm Zeiss… so I’m wondering which lens would be a better choice to compliment my current set of lenses. The Zeiss is hardly ever on my camera, but I’m keeping it simply because I feel Sony/Zeiss won’t produce them anymore in the future. If the 50-400 is a better performer optically, then I’d rather pick it over the Sigma, despite the price difference. But then again, will the difference be noticeable on Sony a7m3 or m4 bodies?
How about astrophotography at 400 mm wide open?
I've got some moon shots in my review, but not star shots.
It's basically a telephoto semi-macro lens?
Yes, though I wouldn't call the up close performance quite macro level in terms of performance.
What VC do you like better on the lens havent had a chance to compare but i use mine mostly handheld shots of firefighters
I'm not quite sure what you are asking. What VC compared to what, exactly?
@@DustinAbbottTWI theres VC mode 1 & 2 im yet to see a difference in either
I want to see third party lenses make 200 or 250mm-800mm
That's longer than what I've seen in zooms. That would be a difficult lens to design.
I bet that Arca Swiss-compatible quick shoe cost Tamron less that $10 to make. What they are charging is criminal.
Can't really argue.
Aliexpress will make some for that exact price haha
Canon users are missing out on the 3rd party Lens market due to the embargo. Canon should retract the embargo
I completely agree.
The shake at the zoom range made me stop my interest. It was so close to be another killer lens like the 35-150mm.
Unless you do a lot of hand-held video shots at 400mm, I don't think it's an issue. If you are doing photography only, the shake doesn't affect the final image output
@@chanjeff4406 I mostly do video and those shakes show in the video. I use mode 3 (erratic movement) in the 200-600mm Sony while on a fluid head and it's extremely smooth while panning. IBIS alone isn't enough at these focal lengths and you need a proper optical stabilization as well. Many say that you should turn off both IBIS and optical stabilizatin while on a tripod and that's the worst advice ever.
@@Bo_Hazem that's unfortunate to hear.
@@chanjeff4406 Hope this feedback helps. Maybe I should check another review as this lens rivals 35-150mm for semi-wide, telephoto, and macro in one! Warm regards.
@@Bo_Hazem thank you, it is very helpful!
❤
:)
big lens
Yes, though no bigger than any of the lenses in the same class.
1st 🤓
:)
Ma man,, great videos but you got to work on your thumbnail game.. sorry to say your channel page looks only and only text.. nothing else.
Disagree. His thumbnails are in line with his content - professional and information-oriented
Disagree. Great thumbnail. Very specific to the content.
I think others have answered for me.
Ita easy to find what lens he talks about what more can you want?
way to soft and junk in low light
Hmmm, not really a lot of sharper lenses across this zoom range.