Full-Frame Tamron 50-400mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread

[Brownie]

I recall a post here about this lens when it was first announced. At the time I was interested but wanted to wait until some tests and images samples were available, then promptly forgot all about it. I started looking for a one-lens solution and ran across it on the B&H site. Watched a few reviews, checked out images, etc. Yesterday was the last day of a sale for $100 off, so I bit.

This is a very interesting review. The things they mention as drawbacks like the restricted burst rate and aperture range are the same as the Sigma 100-400 that I use now, so neither one is of concern to me. The image quality appears to be excellent across the entire range with DPR calling the lens very sharp. There's no sacrifice for the extended 8X superzoom range like one would expect. It also has better weather sealing.

The review from DPR:

Link to the DPR page with shortcut links if you don't want to watch the entire thing:

DPReview TV: Tamron 50-400mm F4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Review

The Tamron 50-400mm F4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD boasts an impressive zoom range in a relatively compact package. How does it perform? We took a look.

www.dpreview.com

 

[liggy]

I think the most recent Tamrons represent serious value for the $. Will be interested to get your feedback once you put it into play.

 

[Brownie]

I think the most recent Tamrons represent serious value for the $. Will be interested to get your feedback once you put it into play.

I think you're spot on. Based on that review I have high hope! It'll be here tomorrow.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I know you are well aware of how good the 24mm 2.8 is, as I remember you looking after I mentioned it. Tamrons newer generation of lenses are phenomenal value IMO

 

[spudhead]

I have never had one I dont even know why.

 

[Brownie]

I have never had one I dont even know why.

A quick look at B&H shows a dozen FF and another eight or so APS-C.

Unfortunately no long primes.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

A quick look at B&H shows a dozen FF and another eight or so APS-C.

Unfortunately no long primes.

That's the one thing I wish Tamron would have a crack at. Bring out a 300 2.8 or 500/600 f4.
There must be a market for a sensibly priced fast prime

 

[spudhead]

That's the one thing I wish Tamron would have a crack at. Bring out a 300 2.8 or 500/600 f4.
There must be a market for a sensibly priced fast prime

Question is can anyone build a good prime at a sensible price

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Sigma did the 500 f4 Sport which was 5k, half the price of the Nikon. It was good too. They also made an 800 5.6 which I don't recall the price of, but it was way less than the Nikon, so yes it is possible. The prices are comparatively reasonable.

 

[spudhead]

Sigma did the 500 f4 Sport which was 5k, half the price of the Nikon. It was good too. They also made an 800 5.6 which I don't recall the price of, but it was way less than the Nikon, so yes it is possible. The prices are comparatively reasonable.

I had a go with the 500 f4 a mate rented on one outing difficult to get a feel for it with so little time on it, I had the sigma 300 f2.8 which was poor compared to the Sony.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Yeah that was a notoriously soft lens

 

[spudhead]

Yeah that was a notoriously soft lens

I had the Tokina 300 2.8 old I know but the gearing in the screw drive was so slow to focus you could drag your phone snap a shot and the lens would still be focusing

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Yeah Tokina. They probably make one or two good lenses, I know the 11mm they make is excellent, but overall they are not great.

 

[Brownie]

Question is can anyone build a good prime at a sensible price

Of course they can. They just don't because they know full well people will pay ridiculous prices for them. In this day of computer technology, why is a fast prime any more expensive than any other lens? It's far more difficult to design and build a good superzoom than a prime. Even with the addition of hand made and assembled parts the price shouldn't be anywhere near $10-12k, that's just asinine.

On another note, Tamron just announced the 70-180/2.8 GII.

 

[Brownie]

Yeah Tokina. They probably make one or two good lenses, I know the 11mm they make is excellent, but overall they are not great.

There were several Tokina 300s, a couple were 2.8. The AT-X AF Pro is rated really high at Dyxum, Sharpness of 4.92 out of 5.

 

[spudhead]

There were several Tokina 300s, a couple were 2.8. The AT-X AF Pro is rated really high at Dyxum, Sharpness of 4.92 out of 5.

YEP I had the non- pro version 300 2.8 when I refer to the 300mm I have had they have all been 2.8, still would not hold a candle to the Minolta 300 2.8 apo I have it looks like someone has knocked nails in with it, it is sharp from 2.8 up. and the sony 300 2.8 mk 1 is not as sharp at 2.8 as the Minolta

 

[spudhead]

Sigma did the 500 f4 Sport which was 5k, half the price of the Nikon. It was good too. They also made an 800 5.6 which I don't recall the price of, but it was way less than the Nikon, so yes it is possible. The prices are comparatively reasonable.

I dont think they did a sony version did they I think it was after they stoped making for sony a-mount, so would have to have been cannon ef and adaptor to sony or their own mount and adaptor to sony

 

[Brownie]

Wife just called. Lens delivered.

I'm at work

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I dont think they did a sony version did they I think it was after they stoped making for sony a-mount, so would have to have been cannon ef and adaptor to sony or their own mount and adaptor to sony

No, Canon and Nikon, some Pentax.

 

[Brownie]

Ok, in a nutshell:

Very well built. Extreme weather sealing, to the extent it's hard to mount. I didn't have enough light late this evening to do a lot, but I did get to do some testing. It is very sharp through the range, and the range is crazy. I shot both SOOC jpegs and RAW. Focus is very fast. One issue, there were a couple times the camera beeped focus, but the lens didn't. A second push of the button corrected it. I have to do more checking, not sure if I accidently moved my focus point or what. All are with A7R III

50mm:

Range. These were shooting almost into the sun, SOOC jpegs. Not meant to be great images, just show the range. It was quite a surprise to see just how broad the covered FL's are. I could simulate it, but having it in hand is eye-opening.
DSC03776 - Copy by telecast, on Flickr

400mm:
DSC03777 by telecast, on Flickr

Easily the widest range lens I've ever had, and difficult to appreciate until you use it.

Some slow-ish shutter tests. Stabilization isn't supposed to be great, but it seems to do ok. One tester had it at about 4 stops.
DSC03792net by telecast, on Flickr

DSC03799 by telecast, on Flickr

Nice bokeh
DSC03801 by telecast, on Flickr

A couple of SOOC jpegs
400mm. I shot this from all the way across the park.
DSC03771 - Copy by telecast, on Flickr

50mm
DSC03775 - Copy by telecast, on Flickr

Color and contrast is excellent. None of these had any saturation boost.

This building is a good example of how sharp it is. Click on it and go to Flickr, then click again to zoom. If you're eyes are good you can read the shop's name on the door.
DSC03817 by telecast, on Flickr

Close focus is very good, 1:2. The problem is that's about 2" from the lens @ 50mm.
DSC03815 by telecast, on Flickr

DSC03758net - Copy by telecast, on Flickr

The focus/not focus issue has me a bit concerned, I need to check it again and also on the A7 IV to make sure I wasn't doing something stupid.

 

[spudhead]

Ok Tim these look way better on flicker account blown up it seems to be the case on this site that files loose detail, its early days as you know for to get an idea, how does focus speed seem and how does it compare to the sigma? Hopefully the focus blip is just a case of fine tuning.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

These look good for a first try out. I reckon it's just a blip, I've always found Tamron to be spot on with focus, maybe a dirty contact (I know it's unlikely with you, but you never know!)

 

[Brownie]

AF is pretty fast, but the Sigma isn't awful. If it is faster, it's minor. Sharpness is really good, especially for a superzoom. I've always wanted one but have shied away due to the typical inherent softness. Tamron seems to have sorted it out on this one. As long as you don't need lens speed it appears to be an excellent choice.

I checked the settings and changed shutter release from balanced to focus on both AF-S and C. It seems to have cleared it up. Took a walk at lunch time and played around some more, no problems. I will also check it on the A7 IV.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Ok, in a nutshell:

Very well built. Extreme weather sealing, to the extent it's hard to mount. I didn't have enough light late this evening to do a lot, but I did get to do some testing. It is very sharp through the range, and the range is crazy. I shot both SOOC jpegs and RAW. Focus is very fast. One issue, there were a couple times the camera beeped focus, but the lens didn't. A second push of the button corrected it. I have to do more checking, not sure if I accidently moved my focus point or what. All are with A7R III

50mm:

Range. These were shooting almost into the sun, SOOC jpegs. Not meant to be great images, just show the range. It was quite a surprise to see just how broad the covered FL's are. I could simulate it, but having it in hand is eye-opening.
DSC03776 - Copy by telecast, on Flickr

400mm:
DSC03777 by telecast, on Flickr

Easily the widest range lens I've ever had, and difficult to appreciate until you use it.

Some slow-ish shutter tests. Stabilization isn't supposed to be great, but it seems to do ok. One tester had it at about 4 stops.
DSC03792net by telecast, on Flickr

DSC03799 by telecast, on Flickr

Nice bokeh
DSC03801 by telecast, on Flickr

A couple of SOOC jpegs
400mm. I shot this from all the way across the park.
DSC03771 - Copy by telecast, on Flickr

50mm
DSC03775 - Copy by telecast, on Flickr

Color and contrast is excellent. None of these had any saturation boost.

This building is a good example of how sharp it is. Click on it and go to Flickr, then click again to zoom. If you're eyes are good you can read the shop's name on the door.
DSC03817 by telecast, on Flickr

Close focus is very good, 1:2. The problem is that's about 2" from the lens @ 50mm.
DSC03815 by telecast, on Flickr

DSC03758net - Copy by telecast, on Flickr

The focus/not focus issue has me a bit concerned, I need to check it again and also on the A7 IV to make sure I wasn't doing something stupid.

Bring it around my place mate. We'll throw it on my lens testing chart. ️

 

[Brownie]

Some more testing. Shaping up to be a very versatile lens.

DSC03833 by telecast, on Flickr

DSC03836 by telecast, on Flickr

DSC03844 by telecast, on Flickr

Crop of above
DSC03844crop by telecast, on Flickr

100% crop
DSC03855 by telecast, on Flickr

150% crop
DSC03849 by telecast, on Flickr

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

It goes bloody well mate!

 

[Brownie]

It goes bloody well mate!

Yeah, I'm going to be very satisfied with it, I think. It'll get a workout this weekend.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Yeah, I'm going to be very satisfied with it, I think. It'll get a workout this weekend.

Couldn't even imagine how well it would pair up with an A7RV...

 

[Brownie]

Couldn't even imagine how well it would pair up with an A7RV...

And unless you buy one, it's likely we'll never know!

Brought it to work today on the A7 IV. Will hopefully get the chance to mess with it some, probably on the same subject matter.

 

[spudhead]

And unless you buy one, it's likely we'll never know!

Brought it to work today on the A7 IV. Will hopefully get the chance to mess with it some, probably on the same subject matter.

Does that work with teleconverters? Tim