Hi all
I have a 7Dmk1 but am considering an upgrade to the Mk2 soon. Either way, I need a good lens for general birds, both in flight and otherwise. Weight is an important factor as I'm knocking on a bit. I would guess the Canon100-400L mk2 would be too heavy for me to feel comfortable holding it.
I'm attracted to the Canon 400mm f5.6 as it's a prime, good IQ and light and I'm considering the Tamron 100-400 following loads of glowing reviews and it's even lighter weight.
What would you say between these two?
The zoom would give more versatile lengths but as mostly I'd be going at the 400mm end, I'm wondering if the prime might be better. OTOH the Tamron is allegedly as good IQ, has IS has the 100-400 range covered and is cheaper.
I'm not sure about the AF but reviews of Tamron's AF are also positive. Also the Tamron, although not a Canon L, is a much newer design than the Canon and has more modern AF tech I guess. I'd welcome anyone's thoughts.
Thank you all.
I have a 7Dmk1 but am considering an upgrade to the Mk2 soon. Either way, I need a good lens for general birds, both in flight and otherwise. Weight is an important factor as I'm knocking on a bit. I would guess the Canon100-400L mk2 would be too heavy for me to feel comfortable holding it.
I'm attracted to the Canon 400mm f5.6 as it's a prime, good IQ and light and I'm considering the Tamron 100-400 following loads of glowing reviews and it's even lighter weight.
What would you say between these two?
The zoom would give more versatile lengths but as mostly I'd be going at the 400mm end, I'm wondering if the prime might be better. OTOH the Tamron is allegedly as good IQ, has IS has the 100-400 range covered and is cheaper.
I'm not sure about the AF but reviews of Tamron's AF are also positive. Also the Tamron, although not a Canon L, is a much newer design than the Canon and has more modern AF tech I guess. I'd welcome anyone's thoughts.
Thank you all.
Last edited: