If you like these videos, make sure to hit that like and subscribe button and drop a comment below! Its the best way to support the work I do here and is much appreciated!

I had my hands on the Tamron 50-400 for 2 weeks and in terms of quality and versatility i absolutely loved it. But being an APS-C user who loves it a bit smaller and lighter, it is just too big and heavy for me. I loved the photos, but i wasnt thrilled about carrying it with me all the time so i just took it with me when i really really really was sure i would need it. And thats where the versatility factor comes to an end - when i have it not with me. So i am really looking forward to the 50-300. I don't necessarily need the 100mm more at the long end. With that crop factor in mind it is a field of view of 450mm anyways so that's ok to me. But i absolutely want the 50 mm at the wide end, even if it is like 75mm for me. Still in my preferred range, i am not much of a a wideangle fan. Conclusion: It is smaller, less heavy, costs less, still suits my focal range needs and has that neat minimal focus distance. I dont make money with my photos it s just a hobby, so some compromises in image quality are fine and so this lens is the better choice for me of the 2 lenses.

Nice review thank you!

I have the 50 400, 17 70 and 11 20 and have never looked back. I also have the 150 500 but dont use it much. Thank you Tamron

Thanks for the first look. As someone else mentioned if you've got the 70-300 to compare the 50-300 to that would be great. If I ended up getting the 50-300 it would be replacing my 70-300 as my lighter zoom when I don't feel like lugging around the 150-500. That extra 20mm might come in handy sometimes. Tamron seems to have ended up being my go to lens maker for my GAS.

Eagerly waiting for your review

0:29 Cute😍 I'm a huge fan of telephoto lenses bro...Tamron 50-300mm lens seems a great option for wildlife and landscape photography, especially considering the price point. This lens is perfect for people who have serious hobbies... Wow clicks are beautiful too🖤

Nice review. Please suggest if this is a good option with apsc bodies like A 6700

@StefanMalloch

11 күн бұрын

Should be great on APS-C as well with a 1.5x crop!

Thanks for the review! Which Tenba backpack is that?

@StefanMalloch

18 күн бұрын

Its this one here - amzn.to/4cgHWKp (Affiliate Link) Had it for years now and great for day trips.

I have the 50-400 & 70-300. This lens is in-between. The earlier 300 is lighter & smaller and can be got much cheaper. It has great optics but less range & not the 1:2 macro. Personally, I have kept it because it is so light. The choice of zooms and their range is enormous.

@CC-gt3ro

6 күн бұрын

@@gitithadani i have the 70-300 as well and would have like to have the choice with the 50-300 VC when i bought it. But the 70-300 has more light entering the lens and it is crazy light. It is so enjoyable to bring it for trailing, wildlife, landscape, portrait and outdoor sport. But having the 50mm would be handy as 70 is sometime too tight. 50-400 seems incredible but heavy. Twice heavier than mine.

@gitithadani

6 күн бұрын

@@CC-gt3ro Yes the 50-400 is double the weight & has the same 50mm macro magnification. I need to carry a larger bag too unlike the 70-300 which easily fits in a waist pouch and a very travel friendly lens. I can carry a lightweight fast prime with it or the very lightweight 28-60. The combined weight would be less than the 50-400. The 400 does give the extra reach and compression.

waiting for a closer look

Thank you so much for the video, Hopefully you can help me with my decision. I am a total beginner with a A7C, Viltrox 16mm 1.8 (for night astro), Sony 55mm 1.8 and the kit lens 28-60....I had been thinking in a zoom lens for travel photography, zoo and id like a lens i could use in a Formula 1 track. Which one would you recommend me to buy??? right now the 50-300 is at 1,100 CAD and the 50-400 is 1,474 CAD and altough there is a $$ difference, 30% difference in cost is not the end of the world. Which one would you recommend me to buy???

@StefanMalloch

9 күн бұрын

50-300 is great for travel. 400 is nice to have if you don't mind the added weight and size. Both great options but slow at a max of F4.5.

Need more range for video wild life and this is great... 50 300mm with macro options

If the autofocus / sharpness on video is the same. It's a question of size over the extra 100mm. If video quality is better on either, that will make my decision for me. I do reportage, so never know what's coming next. 17-50 / 50 - to..... is the plan.

I really would love to know/see when each lens stops down to 6.3. I finally feel old and don't want to carry large lenses all the time (Sony 100-400 and Sony 200-600)

@mw0062

15 күн бұрын

Young man hate carrying heavy lenses too. My setup will be a 17-50 50-300 and a 35 prime.

@michellebaird7035

13 күн бұрын

@@mw0062 Hi, thx for the great initial review. So, even though you like the 50-400 lens better, you will go with the 50-300?

@mw0062

12 күн бұрын

@@michellebaird7035 I would like to have a lighter lens so 50-300 it is. I don't have time to do bird shooting so why bother to have a 1 kg lens in my backpack.

@michellebaird7035

12 күн бұрын

@@mw0062got it. And this lens is better than the 70-300 lens?

Is stabilization of the 50-300 better than ibis with an a7c with the 70-300?

@StefanMalloch

9 күн бұрын

Yes should be. Impressed with the IS in 50-300.

I’m in the tamron ecosystem already so I think I might have to get that 300

I adore my 50-400

It would be very helpful if you could also compare the new 50-300 with the older Tamron 70-300. Is the new lens much better optically? Always enjoy your reviews!

@StefanMalloch

18 күн бұрын

Will do!

@CC-gt3ro

6 күн бұрын

@@chryseass.5143 i doubt. The 70-300 has more light entering the lens and is always sharp, good CA flare control, it is well above its price. But it does not have VC. The advantage of new 50-300 is obviously the VC but it is probably not that big a difference as there is no switch on/off. You get the standard zoom.

@benldr

5 күн бұрын

​@CC-gt3ro I returned the tamron 70-300 because it struggled too much at the longer focal lengths because of the lack of stabilization. It was too limited because you couldn't even shoot on a cloudy day because the shutter speed had to be high enough to keep the photos sharp. It was never an issue at the wider focal ranges. The new lens will solve this problem, wider not being an issue. Plus the Macro and wider capabilities is an added bonus which means less lens changes. I remember being at a parade and 50mm would have been so nice vs the 70mm. The extra light is really only needed because lack of IS at the long end and they are the same in that regard.

@CC-gt3ro

4 күн бұрын

@@benldr it depends if the VC is far better than ibis or not. If vc is similar the 70-300 is better. I have no issue with it. I always select a speed 1/focal length, so 1/300 or close t it at max focal length, and the photo are sharp, i use it only outside with enough lights so no issue here.

@benldr

4 күн бұрын

@CC-gt3ro there are videos on KZread with it on vs off and it makes a huge difference in terms of how slow you can shoot with the shutter speed. You have to crank the shutter speed too high on the 70-300 in my opinion.

Not bad the new lens, but I am waiting for the 28-200 G2-version and will use it day time on the Sony A7CR.

@Princeton_James

17 күн бұрын

I like the current one but that got mixed reviews. Overall positive though.

@edc641

17 күн бұрын

@@Princeton_James I've only seen positive reviews of that lens. I got it myself, and I'm very pleased with it. If I could only have one lens that would be the one. It's also the only lens I bring for multi-day hikes. Excellent value!

@StefanMalloch

11 күн бұрын

Can't wait for an upgraded one as well!

@schnubbel76

6 күн бұрын

I was very disappointed with the image quality of my Tamron 28-200, so i returned it. Maybe i had a bad model? If there will ever be an upgrade WITH stabilisation, i would give it a 2nd chance.

@edc641

6 күн бұрын

@@schnubbel76 What was the issue more specifically? I find my copy to be very sharp. I use it for landscapes. For other types of photography, like portrait or low light situations that demands speed, I can imagine it's not the perfect lens.

Vs Nikon 28-400mm f4-8

They could be doing this in for the RF line up but Canon are being immature and childish.