The new Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD lens will be in stock this Friday


B&H confirmed that the new Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD Lens for Nikon F-mount will be in stock this Friday (November 17th). The price is $799. For comparison: the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 lens is $1,396.95, while the Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary is also priced at $799.

Additional information on the lens:

Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD lens (model A035) officially released

Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD lens (model A035) for Nikon F-mount announced


Like the new Tamron Facebook page and Tamron Facebook group. Check out also Tamron's Black Friday ad Cyber Monday deals.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • fanboy fagz

    not a fan of a front zoom ring. the ergonomics for stability is just not there. when the zoom ring is close. I can use 3 fingers on the lens and my palm and 2 fingers under the bottom grip area.

    with the zoom out in front my elbows are out out in front forcing my shoulders to stabilize and that shit is not stable at all.

    • Spy Black

      It is unfortunate current trends in zoom design put the ring up front in modern zooms, however I tried the Tamron 100-400 out at the Photo Plus Expo, and the stabilization is quite good, and can compensate for this somewhat I think. Overall I consider this lens a good combination of design features and compromises to make a very usable all-around lens.

      The real shortcoming overall is not including the tripod mount. Let’s face it, this is essentially a $25 chunk of metal, it should have been included with the lens. An annoying trend in modern tele zooms is being nickel and dimed for items like this.

      • Tieu Ngao

        Agreed on the tripod mount. According to several reviews the Sigma 100-400mm is really sharp at 400mm, and the Tamron should be as good just by comparing 2 MTF curves (even though they’re not comparable).
        The Tamron has an advantage with the optional tripod mount, but the Sigma price is now $100 off.

      • Chris

        From time to time I am concerned about breaking my mount if I use these lens handheld and had to use left hand working with front zoom ring, leaving more weight on camera end.

  • rolleiflexes

    how will it compare optically to the 200-500? the price point is appealing but i tried the 200-500 and it was pretty sharp. curious how this compares in the 200-400 range

    • Roy Amatore

      The Sigma 100-400 is said to be sharper than the Canon 100-400 mk II, which itself is sharper than the 200-500. So if it competes with the Sigma, probably sharper than the Nikon. The Nikon. However, has VERY effective image stabilization, resulting in sharper results in many situations.

      • Spy Black

        Stabilization felt quite good when I tried it. I don’t realy know how it compares directly to the Nikkor, but it didnt feel lacking.

  • Nikon User

    The Nikon 80-100 and Canon 100-400 could be in deep trouble if this lens proven to be as sharp as the Sigma version and the VR/IS as effective as the Cankon ones.

  • Delmar Mineard Jr

    As said by others, this could be an interesting lens. The front zoom ring doesn’t bother me and if the glass is sharp it represents a nice option. Looking forward to holding this one and checking out that tripod mount.

  • bobgrant

    The Nikon 200-500 is tack sharp and a constant 5.6. There’s no reason not to save up for the Nikon, unless you need the wider 100mm end. Yes, the 200-500 is that good. So good that I sold my 200-400 F4.

    • Graham Blaikie

      However this Tamron lens is significantly more compact, near half the weight and a lot cheaper. On a crop sensor camera like the D500 / D7500 / D7200 etc it makes a lot of sense, giving an equivalent focal range of 150-600.

      • peter w

        allas, both considerations are equally valid.

        Choices to be made.

      • harvey

        On a crop camera, the 200-500 will give a long end equivalent of 750 while this Tamron will top out at 600 equivalent. That is a big difference.

        • Athanasius Kirchner

          It’s only 25% more enlargement and 33% more light for $600 and 1 kg more… I’ll take the Tamron, thank you 😀

          • harvey

            I will take the reach and the extra bit of lens speed. To each their own.

    • Jacob Smith

      Not at almost double the price. Rather get the Tamron with the new 2X teleconverter and still its hundreds less than the Nikon.

      • peter w

        A 1,4x convertor gives somewhat better IQ than cropping in a 500 F4 image, slightly more detail, you loose some shine in the image.
        A 2x convertor gives worse results when stopped down to F10 than cropping in a 500 F4 at F4 with or without 1,4 tc at F5,6.

        And you think to mount a 100-400 on a 2x zoom F6,3? What aperture will you be using? F22 or F32?
        I don’t think I want to see the pictures.

      • harvey

        And your aperture goes up 1 stop so the 6.3 becomes what? About f9.5? Kind of slow if you are looking to shoot wide open.

      • bobgrant

        It will not be as sharp and it’s already VERY slow glass compared to the longer 500mm at 5.6 of the Nikon. If you’re looking for a more compact lens, than the Tamron makes some sense. But if you want a serious 500mm optic that goes toe to toe with a 200-400, the Nikon is worth every penny more.

    • monocolor

      These 100-400mm variable aperture lenses are closer to full frame versions of the 55-300 crop.. essentially a strong performing walkaround telezoom.

      That 200-500 f/5.6 is a different category of telezoom. Something one will likely set on a sturdy tripod or at least monopod. It weighs 4.6 Lbs while the 100-400 from tamron weighs 2.45 Lbs HUGE difference if you are carrying this around all day.

    • Nikon User

      Should people stop considering the great Nikon 80-400 too since the 200-500 trumps this lens category?

  • Boby

    the apeture still quite slow 😐

    • dabug91

      You’re absolutely right. They should instead make it a constant f/4 and charge $2,000.

      • TurtleCat

        It would be far more than $2000…

      • HD10

        The Nikon 200-400mm f/4G VR sells for $7,000. The Canon version with an internal 1.4x extender is $11,000.

        A Tamron 100-400mm f/4 VC at $2,000?

    • Spy Black

      It’s a design compromise. Slower, but more portable and easier to handle.

  • mikerofoto

    is there a comparison somewhere between the sigma ans tamron 100-400?

    • Spy Black

      The lens is not out yet, it will be a while before you’ll see anything like that.

      • mikerofoto

        yea, it is a nice lens to keep a look at but knowing that the sigma already give good results, I want to know how the tamron does. maybe a waiting game for results but it still a chunk of money involded at the end.

        • Spy Black

          Yeah but if you hold out you’ll have a better playing field where you can see all your options.

  • Vincent Alongi

    I’m holding off to save for the Nikon 200-500. Next time I’ll have a need for that lens will be the end of next summer when my son’s football team begins play again. His championship game is this Saturday evening at 4, about a half hour before sunset on a day when we’re expected to see showers. I think I can make due for one last game with the Nikon 70-300 for that day… LOL.

    I’d love the 600mm reach from Sigma, but I’ve read great reviews for the 200-500. It’s also faster.

    • Spy Black

      I don’t think you can really compare the the Nikkor and this Tamron, even if their range is similar, they’re quite different beasts from each other. It comes down to what your needs are of course. If the 200-500 Nikkor is more attractive to you, the 100-400 doesn’t matter, and vice-versa.

  • CG462

    A good full frame kit (camera and lenses) will cost you a lot less than a good m43 kit. That seems kind of nuts to me.

    • Spy Black

      I’m not sure it’s there yet, but it’s close.

      • CG462

        The thing is, you have so many more options with Canon and Nikon in terms of Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina making lenses for them. Plenty of affordable options in the middle range for m43, but go wide or long and the prices start to go way up.

        • Spy Black

          Well yes, the larger universe opens various opportunities, but M4/3 can be fun if you shop for the right gear and understand what it can and can’t do for you. Adapters also make for fun attachment of APS-C and full frame lenses to M4/3 cameras, opening up more opportunities.

          • CG462

            Sure, but that is added expense and you’re still left with expensive lenses at the wide end and far end (at least if you want proper autofocus). I think it’s a mature system but it’s weak at the wide end and long end unless you’re willing to spend big money. And the continuous autofocus is still disappointing, even with the G9. But if you’re okay with manual focus there are some cheaper options at the wide end and long end. But from 17 to 45 there are a lot of affordable options. And come to think of it, Panasonic has that lens that goes out to 300, that is around $600 I think. Still, I wish there were less “leica” and “pro” lenses and more lenses that being introduced that aren’t in that $1,000 plus range.

            • Spy Black

              Yeah, I think M4/3 has “jumped the shark”. It’s kinda lost it’s way. I’m not sure who’s still buying this stuff, especially at the prices.

            • CG462

              GH5 still blows every other hybrid camera out of the water when it comes to video though. Interested to see if the A7siii will be competitive.

            • RC Jenkins

              In general, I agree with all of these points. It seems like m4/3 is generally being squeezed:

              ::From below, phones and 1″ sensor compacts give a size advantage in that they are pocketable, with very good image quality

              ::From above, full-frame has a 2-stop IQ advantage for a given f-number and equivalent focal length.

              m4/3’s primary selling point was its balance (compromises) between size/price/IQ for a single system; but there are now very few m4/3 bodies/lenses that maintain this balance, likely because the market has changed.

              I’m finding that a ‘best of breed’ approach often seems to work better and cheaper.

              For example, an RX100 + Full-frame DSLR gives me a small option + high IQ option;

              as opposed to m4/3, which gives me a larger ‘small’ option + a worse ‘high IQ’ option (large, expensive lenses that end up with worse IQ). Video may be a safe spot for a while, but I suspect other formats will catch up in the next few years, particularly if Nikon designs a new mirrorless mount with versatility in mind.

      • RC Jenkins

        The current micro four thirds lens lens that will give the closest image quality to this Tamron on a full-frame camera will be the Olympus 40-150mm F/2.8 PRO, which retails at about $1400 (USD). Ideally, the direct competitor would be something like a 50-200mm F/2.2-3.1.

        Additionally, there is a Panasonic 45-200 F/4-5.6 ($450), but it’s almost two stops slower in practice (in terms of light).

        • Spy Black

          The Panasonic 45-200 is a much closer comparison, but overall M4/3 has grown too big for it’s britches I think.

          • RC Jenkins

            Again, the Panasonic is almost 2 full stops (4x) less light, deeper DoF, significantly smaller SNR, etc. It’s a further comparison than the Olympus.

            The Panny has only a maximum aperture of 35mm, vs the 63.5mm aperture of this Tamron. That’s almost 4x less area. The Olympus has a 53.5mm aperture.

            Note that I specifically said “closest image quality.” This means frame/field of view, depth-of-field, noise, resolution, etc. That Panny on an m43 won’t come close to this Tamron. The Olympus might.

    • Athanasius Kirchner

      If you need substantial reach and fast burst speeds, 35mm still isn’t really on par (the bodies add a lot of expense), whereas APS-C undercuts MFT by a large margin. The prices of the tele lenses for MFT are absolutely ridiculous, and getting worse every year. And so, one of the system’s greatest strengths is wasted by both manufacturers.

      • CG462

        True. APSC is the best value. You can get the Canon 10-18mm and their 50mm f1.8 together for $349 and it’ll probably be $299 or less soon. I think that was the recent sale price. Compare that to the price of Panasonic and Olympus wide angle zooms. Plus the 50mm makes a nice fast portrait lens on APSC. Just so many more affordable options.

  • Graham Blaikie

    While it is said that the maximum aperture is slow, it is only a 1/3 stop slower than f5.6 which is insignificant. It seems that many lenses in the focal range are coming out at f6.3 and so far they seem to perform very well at f6.3. With modern cameras getting better at high ISO noise performance you shouldn’t have much problem. At the wide end it is 1/3 stop faster than the Sigma version.

    I like that fact that it comes with flourine coating on the front element and that there is a total of eight moisure seals throughout the lens construction. It is a pity the tripod mount is not included. I use the one on my AF Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 only rarely but it is good to have. I also carry the lens/camera combo by the tripod mount foot, so that a heavy lens isn’t putting too much strain on the camera’s lens mount.

    It does have an electromagnetic diaphragm for the Nikon version which is compatible with DX cameras from the D300S and up but excluding the D90 and FX cameras from D3X (no D3, D3s, D700) up to D5 and D850, also including the Df. Firmware might have to be updated.

    • KnightPhoto

      Hang on, ALL NIKON FX DSLRs are compatible with E lenses including D3, D700, D3S). I tried to find you a succinct link from Nikon but this will have to do:
      https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/nikon-e-lenses.503803/

      …it is an old thread so it didn’t list the newest cameras but those are of course all compatible… “Nikon DSLRs that are fully compatible with E lenses, all introduced on August 23, 2007 or after:”

      D3, D3X, D3S, D4, D4S and so on

      D700, D800, D800E, D810, D810A and so on

      D600, D610, D750, Df

      D300, D300S, D500 and so on

      D7000, D7100, D7200 and so on

      D5000, D5100, D5200, D5300, D5500 (there is no D5400) and so on

      D3100, D3200, D3300 (D3000 cannot control the aperture of E lenses) and so on

  • Back to top