so im finally heading out to the ridge for some birding next month and my current kit just isnt cutting it for reach. I've been looking at the tamron 150-600mm g2 since it seems like the gold standard for budget wildlife but im also seeing the 100-400mm for way cheaper. Im shooting on a canon 90d and honestly my budget is topped out at $850 so i'd be buying used. Is the extra 200mm on the g2 actually worth the extra weight and cash or should i just stick with the lighter 100-400? Also seen some people say the g1 version is fine but idk if the autofocus is gonna keep up with fast birds. Which one should i go for...
Just saw this! Honestly if you are doing birds you absolutely NEED the Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2! 400mm is just too short and youll be cropping way too much. The G2 is a total beast and the image quality is amazing! The Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD is lighter for hiking, but for birding? Youll totally regret not having that reach!
I would suggest being very cautious with the first generation version of that lens. The autofocus on the Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD is notoriously sluggish and might struggle to track small birds on a high-resolution body like the 90D. For birding, you really need that 600mm reach to avoid heavy cropping. If you can find a well-cared-for Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 on the used market, it usually stays within your $850 limit and offers significantly better tracking and weather sealing. Be careful when looking at the Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD because while it is lighter, you will likely find yourself wanting more reach almost immediately. I would recommend checking reputable used dealers like MPB or KEH to ensure you get a warranty. Make sure to test the VC system immediately upon arrival to ensure it functions correctly at the long end. The G2 is definitely the budget gold standard for a reason tho... its worth the extra weight.