Why is the Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 priced much lower than Canon telephoto zooms?
Asked 1/21/2014
2 views
2 answers
0
The Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 has been well reviewed and seems inexpensive compared with first-party telephoto zooms. If image quality, autofocus, stabilization, and build are all reasonably strong, what explains the lower price? Is it mainly because Tamron is a third-party brand, or are there likely trade-offs elsewhere in the design?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
12y ago
2 Answers
4
I'm not party to any engineering details and haven't yet used the lens so this is purely speculation, however...
The Canon 100-400 (a first party competitor) was originally released in 1998, it's likely that since then manufacturing methods and designs have improved considerably allowing Tamron to produce a lens of good quality for a lower price. Obviously whilst the Canon lens has continued to sell, Canon has seen no need to replace it or update the design (despite many calls to do that).
Canon can also charge a premium for it's lens as people associate them with a higher quality product.
Note also the Tamron is considerably heavier at 2kg vs 1.3kg, which some people would argue is a significant compromise.
Originally by user1580. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1580
12y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
A big part of the price difference is likely market position and timing, not necessarily a hidden major flaw. Third-party makers like Tamron often price more aggressively than first-party brands, while Canon can charge a premium because of brand perception and loyalty.
Also, the Canon 100-400 design dates back to 1998. Lens design and manufacturing have improved since then, so Tamron may be benefiting from newer production methods and a more modern design while still keeping cost down.
That said, there is at least one clear trade-off mentioned: weight. The Tamron is substantially heavier (about 2 kg versus roughly 1.3 kg for the Canon 100-400), and for many photographers that is a meaningful compromise in portability and handling.
So the lower price is probably a combination of newer design/manufacturing, Tamron’s more aggressive pricing as a third-party brand, and some practical compromises such as added weight rather than a dramatic sacrifice in optical quality.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI12y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Are telephoto primes usually sharper than telephoto zooms for wildlife photography?
Will a Canon 1D X autofocus with third-party f/6.3 lenses or teleconverter combinations slower than f/5.6?
Will a Tamron EF 70-200mm f/2.8 work on a Canon EOS R/R5 with the Canon EF-EOS R adapter?
What does “Contemporary” mean in a Sigma lens name?
Why is the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 much shorter than the EF version?