hosesbroadbill
Well-known member
Sorry I was not clear
The 2 lenses that I own are the Canon 400mm L f5.6 and the Tamron 150-600mm. Canon is far better for BIF. Tamron is as sharp or sharper than the Canon at 400mm for more stationary objects. Plus it is IS which will help in low light situations. Also it is 150-600 so far more versatile. Can't speak for the more expensive options of the DO or a 300, 2.8. For me the Tamron is an amazing value for the money. We recently had a mega rare bird show up and there were loads of images posted. My shots with the Tamron were the best. I really find that you are giving up very little with the Tamron compared to the 400mm 5.6 except BIF capabilities. The Canon is the clear winner. Coming from the fixed Canon and going to a zoom I really like the flexibility that it offers. Plenty of situations where you need to zoom in our out. If I were to buy one lens and wanted to keep it affordable I would go with the Tamron. If money were not an option and you don't mind lugging around the extra weight and having less flexibility than the 300 2.8 with the X2 is the best choice.
When you say both these lenses which Canon are you referring to, I am assuming the 400/5.6 or is it the 100-400. I do not have any of these lenses but it is good to hear your comparison.
After doing bird photography for over 8 years I gave it up more than a year ago and have no long lenses at all these days. I do admit to missing bird snapping and my interest in the Tammy is because I was thinking of picking up another cheap(ish) birding lens. One of my problems is that I have switched to FF (5D3) so effective reach is a problem - weight stops me buying something like a 500/4 (I am a weakling OAP lol) so my options are very limited.
One of my problems is that I previously owned a Canon 300/2.8 IS MkI (stunning lens) so I tend to compare everything else with that lens :-C
I am looking at four options at the moment: 150-600, 400/5.6 (with 1.4x tc), 300/2.8 MkII (with a MkIII 2x tc) or just another 300/2.8 IS MkI (but with a MkIII 2x tc). Trouble is I change my mind daily as what is going to suit me the best.
Yet another option I have been mulling over is to get a Canon 400/5.6 (prev owned this lens for many years) and also a 70D Camera - that way I could use the 1.6 cropper with the the 400 when reach limited or use the lens with the 5D3 when reach was not so important.
The truth is I do not know if I want a s@~t or a shampoo and I change my mind daily lol. Nothing is easy when trying to select new Gear :C:eek!::-C
EDIT: another problem is the Tammy availability in the UK - there were a handful for sale back in February but as far as I can see there has not been any in stock in the UK since then and there is no date as to when it might be available - from what I can see at the moment the Nikon version is likely to be available before anyone has a Canon fit one. By the time they become in stock the summer will be over!!!!
The 2 lenses that I own are the Canon 400mm L f5.6 and the Tamron 150-600mm. Canon is far better for BIF. Tamron is as sharp or sharper than the Canon at 400mm for more stationary objects. Plus it is IS which will help in low light situations. Also it is 150-600 so far more versatile. Can't speak for the more expensive options of the DO or a 300, 2.8. For me the Tamron is an amazing value for the money. We recently had a mega rare bird show up and there were loads of images posted. My shots with the Tamron were the best. I really find that you are giving up very little with the Tamron compared to the 400mm 5.6 except BIF capabilities. The Canon is the clear winner. Coming from the fixed Canon and going to a zoom I really like the flexibility that it offers. Plenty of situations where you need to zoom in our out. If I were to buy one lens and wanted to keep it affordable I would go with the Tamron. If money were not an option and you don't mind lugging around the extra weight and having less flexibility than the 300 2.8 with the X2 is the best choice.