Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 41 votes, 4.90 average.
Old Tuesday 7th April 2015, 01:51   #101
jshen808
John
 
jshen808's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by micloi View Post
Some more with the 1Dx:
Super captures, Mic! Your pictures with the Contemporary keeps getting better and better! :)

Cheers,
John
jshen808 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th April 2015, 10:45   #102
tommybj
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Zealand, Denmark
Posts: 73
It's getting better and better, Mic.

Glad I made a preorder 14 days ago, but still have to wait to 11. May to get the chance to try it:-). Think I will get the dock as well.
tommybj is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 10th April 2015, 01:40   #103
Nick Leech
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Morecambe, Lancashire, UK
Posts: 469
Mic - what adjustments did you make using the dock?
Nick Leech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 10th April 2015, 03:46   #104
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
Just AF micro adjustment
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 12th April 2015, 18:34   #105
Nick Leech
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Morecambe, Lancashire, UK
Posts: 469
Has anyone had a chance to compare IQ of the Contemporary with the Tammy at 600mm?

And the Contemp at 600mm with the Sports at 600mm?

(with same camera body, same subject, same distance, same lighting, same settings etc...)
Nick Leech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 12th April 2015, 19:17   #106
jshen808
John
 
jshen808's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Leech View Post
Has anyone had a chance to compare IQ of the Contemporary with the Tammy at 600mm?

And the Contemp at 600mm with the Sports at 600mm?

(with same camera body, same subject, same distance, same lighting, same settings etc...)
Hi Nick,
This is something I'd like to see in reviews as well. I think once the Contemporary is officially released, we'll be seeing lots of reviews about this.
Cheers, John
jshen808 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th April 2015, 20:29   #107
Nick Leech
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Morecambe, Lancashire, UK
Posts: 469
Got to play with a Sigma Contemporary today and compared IQ at 600mm with my Tammy on my Canon 70D (also tried a few shots on my 6D).

On several comparison shots the Tammy was very slightly better - surprisingly!. On a couple of other comparisons I could see no real difference.

Got to say I am slightly disappointed - I had hoped to see the Siggy to be slightly sharper at 600mm than the Tammy.

I am hoping to have another go tomorrow.......
Nick Leech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th April 2015, 21:16   #108
jshen808
John
 
jshen808's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Leech View Post
Got to play with a Sigma Contemporary today and compared IQ at 600mm with my Tammy on my Canon 70D (also tried a few shots on my 6D).

On several comparison shots the Tammy was very slightly better - surprisingly!. On a couple of other comparisons I could see no real difference.

Got to say I am slightly disappointed - I had hoped to see the Siggy to be slightly sharper at 600mm than the Tammy.

I am hoping to have another go tomorrow.......
Thanks for sharing your first hand experiences, Nick! I'm not surprised with your initial findings. Tamron is a fine lens, I have many photographer friends that have been getting remarkable results from it. For me, I choose Sigma for the ability to fine tune using the usb dock, and also be able to use the 1.4x tele.

On my Nikon DX cropped camera..
600mm x 1.4x tele = 840mm x 1.5x DX crop factor = 1260mm
..I really need this reach to get to those small birds.

Cheers, John
jshen808 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th April 2015, 23:25   #109
the black fox
Registered User
 
the black fox's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: flint
Posts: 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Leech View Post
Got to play with a Sigma Contemporary today and compared IQ at 600mm with my Tammy on my Canon 70D (also tried a few shots on my 6D).

On several comparison shots the Tammy was very slightly better - surprisingly!. On a couple of other comparisons I could see no real difference.

Got to say I am slightly disappointed - I had hoped to see the Siggy to be slightly sharper at 600mm than the Tammy.

I am hoping to have another go tomorrow.......
Nick having had the sport for over a month now ,I can assure you that it's not a simple case of sticking the lens on your camera and using it ,the facility to fine tune the sigmas gives them that extra edge it took me a fair while to get up the courage to play but boy was it worth it .
Given time I think owners and users of the sigma C will come to the same conclusions and then the results will speak for themselves
__________________
see more of my wildlife photos @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/31671466@N07/
the black fox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th April 2015, 12:29   #110
Nick Leech
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Morecambe, Lancashire, UK
Posts: 469
Had a day to carry out more detailed comparisons of Sigma Contemporary versus Tamron 150-600. Took comparison shots at 600mm with both lenses of resolution charts with camera/lens mounted on tripod and using cable release. Same lighting, same ISO, aperture and shutter speed. Also did some shooting using both lenses hand-held.

Pretty much confirmed my earlier conclusion. Very very little difference in IQ, with the edge going to the Tamron. I also felt the Tamron had the following advantages:

- more efficient Image Stabilisation System
- AF marginally faster
- preferred the longer mounting "foot" on the Tammy for carrying the lens/camera around

I recognise that the performance of the Sigma might be improved a shade by using the USB dock to tweak the AF micro-adjustment. (there again, this could be adjusted on the camera for the Tammy also).

I really don't think there is much to choose between these two lenses. As someone who already owns the Tammy, I won't be changing to the Sigma Contemporary - not least because I'd have to sell the Tammy as second-hand and it would cost me 300 or so to make the change!

I am still interested in trying the Sigma Sports and comparing it with the Tammy. I feel a bit uncertain about the weight of the Sports, but would be prepared to tolerate that if the IQ at 600mm is a bit better than the Contemporary and the Tammy.
Nick Leech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th April 2015, 12:43   #111
micloi
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Warwick
Posts: 574
Do you have the comparison shots please? I am very interested in having a look. Thanks
micloi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th April 2015, 17:08   #112
jshen808
John
 
jshen808's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 102
Nick,
Thank you for testing these two lenses! But as Mic mentioned, if you could please provide non-post processed picture samples of each lens, that will be very helpful. As they say, pictures are worth a thousand words. Also, the advantage of the Contemporary is the ability to use a 1.4x tele with the lens. Also, on my low end camera body, it doesn't have micro adjustments feature for the lens, this is again why I chosed the Contemporary lenses ability to be micro adjusted via usb dock on a computer.
From your testings, they both appears to be fine lenses, and I'm glad we have choices! :)
Cheers, John

Last edited by jshen808 : Thursday 16th April 2015 at 17:26.
jshen808 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th April 2015, 18:15   #113
Nick Leech
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Morecambe, Lancashire, UK
Posts: 469
Can someone please advise on sizing requirements for attaching images to forum posts?

(haven't posted photos for ages and can't remember the size limits!)

Thanks.
Nick Leech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th April 2015, 20:19   #114
jshen808
John
 
jshen808's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Leech View Post
Can someone please advise on sizing requirements for attaching images to forum posts?

(haven't posted photos for ages and can't remember the size limits!)

Thanks.
Nick,

For "jpg" files..( jpg 981.3 KB 1600x1200 )

Cheers, John
jshen808 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th April 2015, 20:23   #115
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Leech View Post
Had a day to carry out more detailed comparisons of Sigma Contemporary versus Tamron 150-600. Took comparison shots at 600mm with both lenses of resolution charts with camera/lens mounted on tripod and using cable release. Same lighting, same ISO, aperture and shutter speed. Also did some shooting using both lenses hand-held.

Pretty much confirmed my earlier conclusion. Very very little difference in IQ, with the edge going to the Tamron. I also felt the Tamron had the following advantages:

- more efficient Image Stabilisation System
- AF marginally faster
- preferred the longer mounting "foot" on the Tammy for carrying the lens/camera around

I recognise that the performance of the Sigma might be improved a shade by using the USB dock to tweak the AF micro-adjustment. (there again, this could be adjusted on the camera for the Tammy also).

I really don't think there is much to choose between these two lenses. As someone who already owns the Tammy, I won't be changing to the Sigma Contemporary - not least because I'd have to sell the Tammy as second-hand and it would cost me 300 or so to make the change!

I am still interested in trying the Sigma Sports and comparing it with the Tammy. I feel a bit uncertain about the weight of the Sports, but would be prepared to tolerate that if the IQ at 600mm is a bit better than the Contemporary and the Tammy.
I ordered the Contemporary and will receive it tomorrow. Will be able to test them both side by side on Saturday and will post results. This time I ordered from B&H so if I am not impressed I will return it. Nick if you have flickr, post the links so people can see the full resolution shots.
__________________
Isaac Grant
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th April 2015, 22:13   #116
Nick Leech
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Morecambe, Lancashire, UK
Posts: 469
Isaac - I will be very interested to hear your impressions of the Sigma Contemporary and how it stacks up against the Tamron! If you decide the Sigma Contemp is not for you and return it to B&H, would you consider ordering the Sigma Sports instead to compare against the Tammy? (on the basis that you could return that too if you are not impressed!).

I don't have a Flickr account, but I will consider opening one so I can post my test shots.......

cheers,
Nick
Nick Leech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 05:39   #117
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick Leech View Post
Isaac - I will be very interested to hear your impressions of the Sigma Contemporary and how it stacks up against the Tamron! If you decide the Sigma Contemp is not for you and return it to B&H, would you consider ordering the Sigma Sports instead to compare against the Tammy? (on the basis that you could return that too if you are not impressed!).

I don't have a Flickr account, but I will consider opening one so I can post my test shots.......

cheers,
Nick
Got the lens and took it for a spin. Went to my trusted oystercatcher spot as the birds are close and the action is always good. It is a good test of the lens. My first impressions are that it is as sharp or a bit sharper than the Tamron, but is slower to focus. Will do more tests with it to confirm my initial thoughts. I have the Sigma dock and did 2 custom settings, I changed to dynamic os and also to focus priority (or whatever that setting is). Don't know if that is first day with the lens problems or what. I have my 7d2 set for 1st and 2nd shot focus priority. Perhaps the setting on the lens slowed it down even more? Not sure.

Anyway here are some of my Oystercatcher shots with the lens.

Flying

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...2/17007195670/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...2/16572593974/

Not flying

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...2/17190796201/

And a few with the Tamron for comparison. I did not spend too much time using the Tamron today. Really just a few minutes and did so mostly after using the Sigma. So the sun was higher and the light a bit harsher.

flying

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...n/photostream/

not flying

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553...2/17005321909/
__________________
Isaac Grant

Last edited by hosesbroadbill : Sunday 19th April 2015 at 05:47.
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 09:00   #118
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
 
Roy C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Barnstaple,North Devon,UK
Posts: 16,223
Quote:
Originally Posted by hosesbroadbill View Post
I have the Sigma dock and did 2 custom settings, I changed to dynamic os and also to focus priority (or whatever that setting is). Don't know if that is first day with the lens problems or what. I have my 7d2 set for 1st and 2nd shot focus priority. Perhaps the setting on the lens slowed it down even more? Not sure.
I have often wondered about a conflict between the dock and Camera settings. What would happen if you had one set to 'focus' and one set to 'speed' would they cancel each other out or would one take priority. Or in your case did having both set the 'focus' slow down the AF even more?. My gut feeling is that the Camera settings would take preference but I could well be wrong.
Roy C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 13:54   #119
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy C View Post
I have often wondered about a conflict between the dock and Camera settings. What would happen if you had one set to 'focus' and one set to 'speed' would they cancel each other out or would one take priority. Or in your case did having both set the 'focus' slow down the AF even more?. My gut feeling is that the Camera settings would take preference but I could well be wrong.
It is a very good question Roy. And one that no one has answered properly. The way to do it would be to set the Sigma back to factory settings and go back in the same light and see how it performs. Won't get that chance any time soon. But it is the reason I mentioned it as I was not sure either what was the cause of the slower auto focus.

Roy, do you see any difference in the shots with the two lenses?
__________________
Isaac Grant
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 19:09   #120
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
 
Roy C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Barnstaple,North Devon,UK
Posts: 16,223
Quote:
Originally Posted by hosesbroadbill View Post
Roy, do you see any difference in the shots with the two lenses?
There does not look to be a lot in it to me. I notice that most all of them was shot at less than 600mm - a lot being quite a bit less (you must have been darn close, I have never got within 30 metres or so of a Oystercatcher and its usually a lot further than that lol).
I suppose the only way you could really compare is to shoot at some static target and on a tripod with both lenses at the same focal length.
Roy C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 20:09   #121
hosesbroadbill
Registered User
 
hosesbroadbill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy C View Post
There does not look to be a lot in it to me. I notice that most all of them was shot at less than 600mm - a lot being quite a bit less (you must have been darn close, I have never got within 30 metres or so of a Oystercatcher and its usually a lot further than that lol).
I suppose the only way you could really compare is to shoot at some static target and on a tripod with both lenses at the same focal length.
At this time of year the Oystercatchers are completely preoccupied with themselves. There are a few beaches where plenty of people are always there with cameras. The birds are often very tame as long as you exercise the usual cautions. I just sit down and wait for them to come to me. Always go away from where the people are. Inevitably someone will get too close and flush them. Then they fly right up to where I am. Once they start battling they will fly right past you over and over. A few of them practically hit me. We're too close for focusing and moving way too fast.

from what I can see the Sigma may be a bit sharper but maybe I am just imagining it. The shots of them landed were taken earlier as I said with softer light so I am not surprised that they seem a bit sharper. Need to get a few more shots to form an opinion.

Curious if anyone sees any differences?
__________________
Isaac Grant
hosesbroadbill is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 20:28   #122
Nick Leech
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Morecambe, Lancashire, UK
Posts: 469
Chaps, here is the link to my Flickr page showing some test shots.

a) Sigma C
b) Tamron
c) Canon 400mm f5.6
d) Canon 400 with x1.4 extender (Canon Mk2)

These are the only test shots I have left, having deleted all the others!

Same target, same camera (70D), all tripod mounted with cable release, same ISO, f8. All similar shutter speed.

I can see very little difference between the Siggy-C and the Tamron. I slightly prefer the IQ on the Tammy, but very close.

Interested to hear other people's take on these!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/130850507@N03/?
Nick Leech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 21:11   #123
Paul - Herts
Paul Herts
 
Paul - Herts's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: herts
Posts: 1,359
I have a slight preference for the Sigma but, imo only, both beat the 400 and tc combo plus the 400 zoomed in looks way softer
__________________
My efforts at photography and YouTube can be viewed here:http://www.flickr.com/photos/43324529@N04/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsi...4JiGEtA/videos
Paul - Herts is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 21:37   #124
tommybj
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Zealand, Denmark
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by hosesbroadbill View Post
At this time of year the Oystercatchers are completely preoccupied with themselves. There are a few beaches where plenty of people are always there with cameras. The birds are often very tame as long as you exercise the usual cautions. I just sit down and wait for them to come to me. Always go away from where the people are. Inevitably someone will get too close and flush them. Then they fly right up to where I am. Once they start battling they will fly right past you over and over. A few of them practically hit me. We're too close for focusing and moving way too fast.

from what I can see the Sigma may be a bit sharper but maybe I am just imagining it. The shots of them landed were taken earlier as I said with softer light so I am not surprised that they seem a bit sharper. Need to get a few more shots to form an opinion.

Curious if anyone sees any differences?
If I should do a "blind test" I would not be able to tell which picture were taken with Sigma or Tamron they are very close both in sharpness and contrast.

But i'm curious what maked the AF slower with the Sigma. Others has told it was the Tammy with slower AF when compared.
tommybj is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th April 2015, 21:49   #125
Nick Leech
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Morecambe, Lancashire, UK
Posts: 469
Tommy, I felt that the Tamron was very slightly quicker to AF than the Sigma-C. For example, setting the focus at minimum focus and pointing the lens at a distant tree and seeing how quick it is to AF on the distant object. For the copies I had to compare, the Tamron was very slightly quicker than the Sigma-C.

I note that Isaac thought the same - see his post #117 above.
Nick Leech is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HELP PLEEEEAAASSE Sigma 300mm 2.8 prime or sigma 120-300 2.8 JohnHPhotography Cameras And Photography 4 Thursday 17th January 2013 14:07

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.24953699 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:18.