# Tamron to Announce New Superzoom, 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 VC HLD



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 19, 2017)

```
<p>Tamron will soon be announcing an 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD superzoom for APS-C cameras alongside the new Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC G2 this week.</p>

		<style type='text/css'>
			#gallery-4 {
				margin: auto;
			}
			#gallery-4 .gallery-item {
				float: left;
				margin-top: 10px;
				text-align: center;
				width: 25%;
			}
			#gallery-4 img {
				border: 2px solid #cfcfcf;
			}
			#gallery-4 .gallery-caption {
				margin-left: 0;
			}
			/* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */
		</style>
		<div id='gallery-4' class='gallery galleryid-29862 gallery-columns-4 gallery-size-thumbnail'><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_1.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_1-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_1-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_1-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon portrait'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_4.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_4-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_4-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_4-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><dl class='gallery-item'>
			<dt class='gallery-icon landscape'>
				<a href='http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_3.jpg'><img width="168" height="168" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_3-168x168.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail" alt="" srcset="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_3-168x168.jpg 168w, http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/tamron_3-144x144.jpg 144w" sizes="(max-width: 168px) 100vw, 168px" /></a>
			</dt></dl><br style="clear: both" />
		</div>

<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Wizardly (Jun 19, 2017)

Can't wait to see the test charts to see how well they did.


----------



## andrei1989 (Jun 19, 2017)

wow...largest zoom range...ever? for dslr that is..


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 19, 2017)

I wonder if it is compatible with the dock?

Definitely something to think about for those times when you only the one lens with you....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 19, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> Tamron will soon be announcing an 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD superzoom for APS-C cameras



I really think 'superzoom' doesn't go far enough. Megazoom? Ultrazoom? Überzoom? Something...


----------



## bsbeamer (Jun 19, 2017)

Do wonder how the f-stop breakdown goes throughout the zoom range. If 300mm at better than 5.6 it could be a great replacement for those using 70-300's along with another lens. 

Would love to see a full frame version of this released down the line. A 24-400 or 28-400 would be a killer compact super/ultra/uber-zoom to be able to travel with. 

Also would love to see a full frame equivalent of the 18-135 STM. This is such a nice lens with very nice focal coverage without too much trade-off at the far end (still at f/5.6). A 28-200 or 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 (or better) with VC would be nice. The current 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 is a little too slow at the far end and does not really warrant using over a 70-300.


----------



## 9VIII (Jun 19, 2017)

As soon as things stop being "Super" they usually turn into "Monsters".
That said, in the sports car world the tier above "Supercar" is "Hypercar", or at least that's the way Clarkson usually puts it.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jun 19, 2017)

I do get this question from my 12 y.o. from time to time: Dad, why do you have to swap your lenses and cameras all the time, Are you OCD?? Can you not just use your best lens instead? I guess, this Tamron mega (Anti-OCD) zoom is the ultimate answer  I would hazard the guess, that it would not be my best lens though?


----------



## SkynetTX (Jun 19, 2017)

I don't see the point of ultrazoom lenses. Okay, it's only one lens to carry and even this will be lighter than the 10-18mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm (or 100-400mm) but the image quality will surely be somewhat lower than the ones above. And we use interchangeable lens cameras to use the specific lens for the specific situation, don't we? By the way, a 10-400 lens could be better.


----------



## hovland (Jun 19, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> I really think 'superzoom' doesn't go far enough. Megazoom? Ultrazoom? Überzoom? Something...



Überzoom? 8)

could be an interesting lens on a eos M camera


----------



## HaroldC3 (Jun 19, 2017)

Next up are complaints that people upgraded from a P&S superzoom to a DSLR with this lens and don't see much difference in their pictures yet they paid 3 times as much for the package.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jun 19, 2017)

I doubt IQ will even match 18-300mm lens at best. But then there are a lot of travel photographers willing to make compromise on convenience vs IQ. Still no word on whether remaining two macro lenses in Tamron lineup will be updated or not. Almost forgot about ageing 17-50mm f2.8 lens which could also use a upgrade at this point.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 19, 2017)

I got an early copy of this one and man, did it deliver.

Here's a _stunning_ keeper from my recent shoot.

- A


----------



## rfdesigner (Jun 19, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Tamron will soon be announcing an 18-400mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD superzoom for APS-C cameras
> ...



checking online grammatical meanings, the roots of the words:

Hyper -> excessive or exageration
Super -> above or beyond.
Ultra -> above or beyond.
mega -> large
giga -> from greek "gigas" meaning giant.

On that count it's not clear, except to say a Hyper-zoom does sound pretty good.


----------



## aceflibble (Jun 20, 2017)

It'll likely only be f/3.5 for the first <5mm. That said, even f/6.3 is pretty good for 400mm, especially given that for the kinds of things 400mm is typically used for you're also most often going to be using f/7.1-11 anyway.

The big sticking factor of a lens like this will be the AF. Third-party AF can never be perfect, and AF is really important for a jack-of-all-trades lens. Everybody will accept lower image quality because that's just what you expect out of larger zoom ranges, but if the AF isn't up to scratch then that immediately wipes out a lot of the grab-and-go appeal of a lens like this.



SkynetTX said:


> I don't see the point of ultrazoom lenses. Okay, it's only one lens to carry and even this will be lighter than the 10-18mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm (or 100-400mm) but the image quality will surely be somewhat lower than the ones above. And we use interchangeable lens cameras to use the specific lens for the specific situation, don't we? By the way, a 10-400 lens could be better.


Just because there are times you want to choose a specific focal length does not mean that there will never be a point when you'd rather just have one big zoom. Just as we still have both zooms and primes of all kinds made, even though zooms as sharp as primes (and in the case of Sigma, as fast) have existed for a couple of decades now.

You may as well say you don't see the point in SLR existing now that we have mirrorless, or that there's no point in focus rings now that autofocus is very reliable.


----------



## Jopa (Jun 20, 2017)

One step closer to the 11-1200mm goal.


----------



## weixing (Jun 20, 2017)

Hi,


ahsanford said:


> I got an early copy of this one and man, did it deliver.
> 
> Here's a _stunning_ keeper from my recent shoot.
> 
> - A


 Wow! Top class bokeh... hee hee 

Anyway, if it's small enough, might be a good "record shot" lens for my M5.

Have a nice day.


----------



## gn100 (Jun 20, 2017)

Jopa said:


> One step closer to the 11-1200mm goal.


... I was thinking of the 5-5000mm f0.75 IS pancake ...... or is that another step further? ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 20, 2017)

SkynetTX said:


> I don't see the point of ultrazoom lenses. Okay, it's only one lens to carry and even this will be lighter than the 10-18mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm (or 100-400mm) but the image quality will surely be somewhat lower than the ones above. And we use interchangeable lens cameras to use the specific lens for the specific situation, don't we? By the way, a 10-400 lens could be better.



Sometimes you have space for only one lens, or you are in a situation where a dropped lens sinks to the bottom of the river, or both. When kayaking, the camera comes along in a deck bag. One lens only! 

(apologies for picture quality, the original is not with me and this one was posted on facebook and they heavily compressed it)


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 20, 2017)

bsbeamer said:


> Do wonder how the f-stop breakdown goes throughout the zoom range. If 300mm at better than 5.6 it could be a great replacement for those using 70-300's along with another lens.
> 
> Would love to see a full frame version of this released down the line. A 24-400 or 28-400 would be a killer compact super/ultra/uber-zoom to be able to travel with.
> 
> *Also would love to see a full frame equivalent of the 18-135 STM.* This is such a nice lens with very nice focal coverage without too much trade-off at the far end (still at f/5.6). A 28-200 or 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 (or better) with VC would be nice. The current 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 is a little too slow at the far end and does not really warrant using over a 70-300.



I've been beating that drum for a while - give me a 24-200 IS STM for FF and I will be a happy camper. Especially if they deign to include weathersealing...

That 18-135STM is much of the reason I want the SL2.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 20, 2017)

hovland said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I really think 'superzoom' doesn't go far enough. Megazoom? Ultrazoom? Überzoom? Something...
> ...



I think I've already seen "hyperzoom" used for the 18-300-class lenses.

As for EOS M, why? This thing is long enough to wipe out any size advantage of a smaller body; why not use a small crop DSLR with it?


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 20, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> wow...largest zoom range...ever? for dslr that is..


... impressing if delivered with a decent IQ and a good in production QC.
Not my lens, but fascinating, what they're (all lens makers) do this time.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jun 20, 2017)

Compromise lens - will of course not have outstanding quality. I have the FE 24-240mm lens for these sorts of days, and although it's not a lens I would use all the time, it's useful for that time you really only absolutely have to carry a single lens only.

I guess this will be the same sort of thing.

And also, absolutely zero chance of it even being f/5.6 at 300mm, it'll be f/6.3 from at least 300 to 400 I'm sure.


----------



## SkynetTX (Jun 20, 2017)

Though superzooms can be useful in some situations I think it's better to have more specific lens with you. I always have at least my general – currently the 18-55mm IS II – for landscapes and buldings and my 60mm macro with me just in case.


----------



## alan sh (Jun 20, 2017)

I'd like to try it on my Canon M5.


----------



## dsut4392 (Jun 20, 2017)

I've got the 28-300 full frame version which is honestly not bad. It's a noticeable step below the Canon 24-105L and 16-35/4L in sharpness and contrast, but better than it should be for the size and weight. Focusing speed and accuracy are both comparable to the 24-105. As a travel lens in particular It's a worthwhile compromise compared to carrying a 24-70 and 70-300, as much for the convenience of not having to change as frequently as it is for the considerable weight saving. My current travel kit consist of 16-35/4, 28-300 Tammy and 50/1.4 Sigma EX.


----------

