Tamron 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD : Specifications and Opinions

Reviews

What do you think?

Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 259000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.

Adriano G

sent on 04 Marzo 2022

Pros: Value for money, light, tropicalized

Cons: For what it costs, I did not find any, however....

Opinion: I do not own it, but I have just tried it, about 10 pm on the street, so the worst light condition, on the 600D of my neighbor with this 100-400 mounted and frankly it seems to me that it has a more than dignified quality to be a cheap handyman. I also did a couple of portraits on the fly with the pop-up flash and the photos came out well. Plastic of course, but of sufficient workmanship to be scrambled, light and tropicalized. I liked it. There is a pero'.... given the price, on Canon, I would opt for the 70-200mm F4, which despite having half of the maximum focal length, but having higher quality lenses collects many more details allowing you to have a higher quality even enlarging and cutting the photo. Summarizing... if the priority is to have a 28.8-640mm on A-PSC, giving up quality, then the expense of 700/800 euros for an economic objective, is justified. Otherwise, published views and photos that mostly concern photographic hunting, if the priority is to have maximum excursion, then it is better to take a used 70-200 and get much better results even by cropping the image abundantly.

Alba75

sent on 01 Maggio 2021

Pros: I don't know

Cons: all

Opinion: Tired of carrying at least a couple of goals (15-85 and 70-300 Canon on 80D) a year ago I took this superzoom to use as a unique lens in the hope that it was of decent quality. Let's say it was the worst lens ever, beating the very bad 18-200 IS hands down. Color aberration all the way, distortion but above all kneaded and poorly defined images to all focal points and openings. I certainly didn't expect the moon with a similar focal hike but it wasn't that unusable either. Vote 4

Marco Rebesco

sent on 07 Aprile 2021

Pros: Versatile, I thought less sharp at 400, from the tests I did in full light.. my problem is not being able to close too much by going into difraction. It has a more robust look than the 16-300 it replaces.

Cons: I miss the ring with distances. Useful at night.

Opinion: I know it's not crisp at 400 at full opening, but photographing during the day is no problem going beyond F8. In fact, in macro I tend to close to have more PDCs. I don't need a blade.. I don't think I have to croppare. Obviously at 400 you have to have a steady hand but from the first tests it does not seem to me to be bad. I do not claim to challenge specialized optics but what I have is enough for me and advances. I would have spent more on a heavier and more sophisticated 15-400.. Lightness for me is a machine, an optics and a battery...

Antoniosilva

sent on 01 Giugno 2019

Pros: -

Cons: Unusable on long focal lengths

Opinion: Bought to replace an old Tamron 18-270 that worked really well but that was beginning to show signs of age. It was a big disappointment because at the longest focal lengths does not focus well and produces indecorous images. Clear that at such a price can not expect excellent performance but I expected a yield at least equal to 18-270. I immediately made the lens is I'm considering to buy another one because I get the doubt that it can be defective so much is the lack of quality...

Dani.ippolito

sent on 24 Luglio 2018

Pros: Lightness, brightness, compactness

Cons: -

Opinion: For 630 euros you have a travel handyman. I thought worse rather bright enough. I used it in Kenya and I found it very good for the ductility of its focal hike. Definitely over 250mm starts to lose a bit ' but for this figure is a right compromise. Excellent stability, the autofocus is sometimes slightly slower than fractions of a second.

Hippolais

sent on 27 Dicembre 2017

Pros: Brighter than expected, weight, focusing distance

Cons: it is at most an effective 18-280, at "400mm" it is clear only at f10-12

Opinion: I bought this lens on an agreement with amazon and, after receiving it, I compared it with the Canon 100-400II. Already at 100 mm the magnification in Tamron is slightly lower than the Canon, but then the gap increases to 200 mm and finally, at 300 and 400 mm, the Tamron almost no longer enlarges, reaching an intermediate magnification factor between 200 and 300 of the Canon. I checked with the store, returning it, that it was not my goal to be defective, but that even a second Tamron 18-400 lens was just like a "package". So I asked for a refund. Of course I am amazed by the lack of seriousness of Tamron.rnResto available to send, to those who wanted it, the file comparison between the Canon lens and the Tamron