Canon 100-400 or tamron 150-600

[bobandcar]

I've been toying around the idea of getting one of these 2 lenses.
It would be the version 1 of the canon
I currently use a 70-200f4 non is lens with a 1.4 extended but am always at either the long end of that or the short end.

I mainly shoot birds at these longer lengths. I want a lens that deos all of what I currently do but is longer. The IS on both these is a huge jump up. If like to be able to carry the lens for 5-6 hours without problems.
Anyone have expierience with both of these?
Is there something I'm not thinking about?

 

[Ted Evans]

I've been toying around the idea of getting one of these 2 lenses.
It would be the version 1 of the canon
I currently use a 70-200f4 non is lens with a 1.4 extended but am always at either the long end of that or the short end.

I mainly shoot birds at these longer lengths. I want a lens that deos all of what I currently do but is longer. The IS on both these is a huge jump up. If like to be able to carry the lens for 5-6 hours without problems.
Anyone have expierience with both of these?
Is there something I'm not thinking about?

I cannot answer your question but a suggestion would be to do a search on Flickr for each lens and see what you think would serve your needs better.

This is a link for one that does mostly birds and many of them with the Tamron 150-600 where you can see its capabilities.

Flickr krisinct- Thanks for 5 Million views as of Jan 12 s Photostream

 

[JacaRanda]

Tough call. Since you mention birding and long end, I would suggest the Tamron. 600mm at the price is just (you figure it out).

However, the extra weight of the Tamron can not be ignored. My wife carries the 100-400 around for hours, and I carry the Tamron around for hours. One day we switched and after maybe 5 minutes, she was passing the Tamron back to me.

Which camera body will you be using?

 

[runnah]

Tamron has more reach, great VC and snappy af. The downsides are the image quality isn't as good as the canon and the build quality is good but not an L lens quality.

 

[bobandcar]

I'm using a t3i.
I'll have to look at the weights. Didn't think of that. I'm pretty good about it not bothering me to much. Also I don't like the white of the canons.

 

[bobandcar]

We will see. I won a auction for the 100-400 for a good price. Will see how my transaction goes

 

[Didereaux]

We will see. I won a auction for the 100-400 for a good price. Will see how my transaction goes

...so after this long of time are you happy with the 100-400?

 

[bobandcar]

I really like it. The push/pull is fine. After a few months it got harder to push pull and after my upcoming vacation I'm sending In for a cleaning and a checkup.
It's sharp, I usually shoot at f8 when I can but still get good sharpness at 5.6 throughout.

 

[jaomul]

One thing for definite though is the Canon is better in the 100-149 range, but the Tammy is better 401-600 range

 

[zombiesniper115 14]

Have you thought about keeping the 70-200 for general purpose shooting and picking up a 400mm F5.6 prime. It's a great sharp lens and is very light. As for the IS, your shutter speed should be high enough (birds in flight) to negate any benefit.
Below is a good comparison between Tamron/Sigma 600 vs Canon 400.

 

[bobandcar]

As of right now I actually have kept the 70-200 and the 100-400 and the 1.4x
Seems like there are times when the 70-200 just works better