Canon EF 70-300mm vs Tamron 18-400mm vs Tamron 100-400mm

[phantomsteve]

I'm toying with the idea of getting a new lens, and have narrowed it down to those three.

I'm using a 77D, and my current telephoto is Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM

I am looking for a longer lens, for photos of birds and of air displays.

My current options are (approx price in brackets):

• Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM (£500)
• Tamron 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 DI II (£600)
• Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 DI VC USD (£700)

I am a relative newcomer to 'proper' photography, and I'm not sure which is the best for me... I could stretch to the £700 if necessary, hence why it's there!

All my lenses so far are Canon ones. Is the Canon one worth it for the extra 50mm?

Has anyone got experience of these lenses? Any advice, or questions to ask myself to help me make a final choice?

There's no rush, as if I get one it won't be for a few months yet, when I have the cash!

Thanks
Steve

[colin C]

Hi Steve .............. my opinion only:

The magic number for wildlife is 400mm and that just gets you to the party. Anything longer and life starts to get a bit easier.

Although the Canon 70-300mm is a better lens than your 55-250mm, it doesn't meet the 400mm criteria. I also wouldn't touch an 18-400mm from any manufacturer with a bargepole. Anything with a 22x zoom is such a compromise on design and manufacture. I would look at a 4x zoom and even better a 2x zoom, where there are virtually no compromises. So that leaves you with the Tamron 100-400mm at around £700 and for that money, you are in the territory of a pre-owned Canon EF 100-400mm (MK I) and also the Canon Prime 400mm f5.6. Both are Canon L series lenses and I have just checked an auction site and prices are around the £700 range.

For versatility I would go for the 100-400, for the highest quality I would go for the 400mm. I have owned/used both and in my opinion, they beat the pants off third party lenses.

Hope that helps.

[@imagesBV]

I agree with Colin’s comments. You have the crop factor though so your current 250 equates to around 400mm full frame…an extra 50mm isn’t going to offer much more reach….My choice would be a Mk1 Canon 100-400L second hand….I think it will blow you away (I’ve had the 55-250 and 100-400)…not taking anything away from the 55-250 it is excellent. The 100-400 will give you equivalent full frame reach of 640mm.
if you really want new then the Tamron is the way to go.
I know I’m probably a bit odd in preferring Canon glass to third party….but they all have built in electronics and I’d prefer to be certain about future body compatibility.

[Trev B]

I've had the Canon 70-300mm was never very impressed with it, agree with the comments above. Fully agree with Colin's comment 400mm is the starting point for most wildlife photography unless you are specialising in elephant photography

[cjf999]

I agree with Colin regarding the 100-400 lens. It is a good lens. There is one other that you could consider and that is the Sigma 150-600 C lens. This I believe is around the £700 mark.

Chris.

[antoeknee]

The Sigma is about 850 new. Though second hand should be a bit cheaper.

[cjf999]

Apologies I didn’t check the price. To be honest didn’t realise it had gone up. Sorry.

Chris

[phantomsteve]

Thanks for the replies - it helps! As I said, I am a relative newcomer to DSLR photography (a bit under 3 years), so thought I'd ask in a group where I know there are knowledgeable folks with many years of experience and knowledge!

I'll look into the suggestions :)