Tamron 200-400mm f5.6 Review

Introduction

There are a lot of lens reviews on the Internet (see links at the end of the page). Instead of repeating endless spec sheets and listing the lens' features, what I intend to do with this review is to give an end-user's perspective -- what it's been like for me, as an amateur photographer, to shoot pictures with this lens.

I've owned this lens since 1997. It's the first version (model number 75DN); there is at least one newer version (model 175DN). From the spec sheets in the brochures I own I can't see what's the difference between them.

I'm an amateur photographer who has shot about one picture a day in average since 1989. You can see my pictures in The Gallery.

What I think

Even though I shoot with regularity, I've found over time that I almost never use this lens. I have taken maybe one roll with it, certainly no more.

There are two main reasons for this: weight and size. I don't like to carry a lot of weight around, and I've found the 1,210g (about three pounds) just too much. Size is a problem for me also, because this lens is long. Since it's a push-pull design, it's even longer when zooming in. I normally shoot in an urban environment, and I just don't like the attention the size of this lens generates.

I really wanted to like this lens when I bought it. I tested it in the store and decided I would like it, but I was wrong. I am a telephoto kind of photographer, I love to concentrate in details or take pictures from afar, unnoticed, and 400mm is great for this. In the long run, however, I found the lens unusable.

I'm convinced that in a more "natural" environment, when one is not constantly surrounded by people, I'd carry this lens more often. I just can't prove it.

Performance

This lens is not very fast at f5.6, but the constant aperture is always appreciated.

Manual focus is hard in my Nikon FM2. The image is dark enough to darken the focusing prism in all but the brightest light. The very shallow depth of focus only worsens things.

Autofocus is slow in my Nikon F80, and not very quiet. It's not my area of interest, but I wouldn't like to be shooting wild life with a lens this noisy. I think the slowness with the F80 is caused because f5.6 is about the limit of the F80's AF sensor, according to the specs (although in good light f8 is usable), and also maybe because the lens AF mechanisms are a bit heavy for its motor. The lens is focused by rotating its front element, which, at 400mm, is located far away from the camera. I'm sure an F100 or F5 would perform better.

Given its weight, I find it almost impossible to shoot hand-held. Maybe I lack the proper technique, but bear in mind that at f5.6 maximum aperture you're not likely to get very often the required 1/500th shutter speed to expect photos without blur. The lens includes a tripod mount that I have not used but looks solid and can be rotated.

One can't really tell after just one roll, but I'm not convinced this lens is sharp. I don't know if this is because I shot hand-held or because of the difficulty I had focusing manually.

Conclusion

I think it's obvious I have problems with this lens. As conclusion I want to point out its great advantage: price. At about US $500, it's much cheaper than its competition. Its price/performance ratio is very good because, in spite of its problems, its price can allow you to shoot pictures that are impossible to shoot with better but more expensive lenses that remain sitting in a store shelf.

Please send comments on this review to: webmaster@thewizardstower.org