Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 DI IF VC USD (2 Viewers)

[hosesbroadbill]

Sorry I was not clear

When you say both these lenses which Canon are you referring to, I am assuming the 400/5.6 or is it the 100-400. I do not have any of these lenses but it is good to hear your comparison.
After doing bird photography for over 8 years I gave it up more than a year ago and have no long lenses at all these days. I do admit to missing bird snapping and my interest in the Tammy is because I was thinking of picking up another cheap(ish) birding lens. One of my problems is that I have switched to FF (5D3) so effective reach is a problem - weight stops me buying something like a 500/4 (I am a weakling OAP lol) so my options are very limited.
One of my problems is that I previously owned a Canon 300/2.8 IS MkI (stunning lens) so I tend to compare everything else with that lens :-C

I am looking at four options at the moment: 150-600, 400/5.6 (with 1.4x tc), 300/2.8 MkII (with a MkIII 2x tc) or just another 300/2.8 IS MkI (but with a MkIII 2x tc). Trouble is I change my mind daily as what is going to suit me the best.
Yet another option I have been mulling over is to get a Canon 400/5.6 (prev owned this lens for many years) and also a 70D Camera - that way I could use the 1.6 cropper with the the 400 when reach limited or use the lens with the 5D3 when reach was not so important.
The truth is I do not know if I want a s@~t or a shampoo and I change my mind daily lol. Nothing is easy when trying to select new Gear :C:eek!::-C

EDIT: another problem is the Tammy availability in the UK - there were a handful for sale back in February but as far as I can see there has not been any in stock in the UK since then and there is no date as to when it might be available - from what I can see at the moment the Nikon version is likely to be available before anyone has a Canon fit one. By the time they become in stock the summer will be over!!!!

The 2 lenses that I own are the Canon 400mm L f5.6 and the Tamron 150-600mm. Canon is far better for BIF. Tamron is as sharp or sharper than the Canon at 400mm for more stationary objects. Plus it is IS which will help in low light situations. Also it is 150-600 so far more versatile. Can't speak for the more expensive options of the DO or a 300, 2.8. For me the Tamron is an amazing value for the money. We recently had a mega rare bird show up and there were loads of images posted. My shots with the Tamron were the best. I really find that you are giving up very little with the Tamron compared to the 400mm 5.6 except BIF capabilities. The Canon is the clear winner. Coming from the fixed Canon and going to a zoom I really like the flexibility that it offers. Plenty of situations where you need to zoom in our out. If I were to buy one lens and wanted to keep it affordable I would go with the Tamron. If money were not an option and you don't mind lugging around the extra weight and having less flexibility than the 300 2.8 with the X2 is the best choice.

 

[chris129]

The 2 lenses that I own are the Canon 400mm L f5.6 and the Tamron 150-600mm. Canon is far better for BIF. Tamron is as sharp or sharper than the Canon at 400mm for more stationary objects. Plus it is IS which will help in low light situations. Also it is 150-600 so far more versatile. Can't speak for the more expensive options of the DO or a 300, 2.8. For me the Tamron is an amazing value for the money. We recently had a mega rare bird show up and there were loads of images posted. My shots with the Tamron were the best. I really find that you are giving up very little with the Tamron compared to the 400mm 5.6 except BIF capabilities. The Canon is the clear winner. Coming from the fixed Canon and going to a zoom I really like the flexibility that it offers. Plenty of situations where you need to zoom in our out. If I were to buy one lens and wanted to keep it affordable I would go with the Tamron. If money were not an option and you don't mind lugging around the extra weight and having less flexibility than the 300 2.8 with the X2 is the best choice.

I have both lenses also and I agree with everything you said. On a tripod both lenses produce AFAICT equal image quality and that is for with and without the Tamron 1.4 TC on the Canon. In terms of focusing, the Canon is better with and without the TC. The Tamron tends to get lost at 600 mm. This is rectified by backing off to 550 mm and or using live view. If you're on a tripod, your subject is sitting still and you have a 70D I recommend live view focusing with the Tamron.

 

[fogboundturtle]

I have both lenses also and I agree with everything you said. On a tripod both lenses produce AFAICT equal image quality and that is for with and without the Tamron 1.4 TC on the Canon. In terms of focusing, the Canon is better with and without the TC. The Tamron tends to get lost at 600 mm. This is rectified by backing off to 550 mm and or using live view. If you're on a tripod, your subject is sitting still and you have a 70D I recommend live view focusing with the Tamron.

This must be a problem on older crop sensor body . I had nothing but great success in finding focus in the most difficult situation on the 5D3. Even finding a bird through branches. When I had my 70D, I didn't have too much trouble either. Is this something that is directly related to older camera like the 7D or 60D ?

Here's an example I did last weekend : https://flic.kr/p/nnhr7b

Note : I had nothing but slow AF whenever I use an extender on Canon lens. I thought it was a lot more difficult than just using the Tamron.

 

[chris129]

This must be a problem on older crop sensor body . I had nothing but great success in finding focus in the most difficult situation on the 5D3. Even finding a bird through branches. When I had my 70D, I didn't have too much trouble either. Is this something that is directly related to older camera like the 7D or 60D ?

Here's an example I did last weekend : https://flic.kr/p/nnhr7b

Note : I had nothing but slow AF whenever I use an extender on Canon lens. I thought it was a lot more difficult than just using the Tamron.

I have a 70D and it will go through the whole focal range at 600 mm trying to lock on. This is with single point AF.

 

[Hor Kee]

I have a 70D and it will go through the whole focal range at 600 mm trying to lock on. This is with single point AF.

This was the exact reason that I stuck with my 400mm 5.6 lens in the end. The focusing, especially for moving birds no matter how slowly, was just abysmal.

 

[fogboundturtle]

I have a 70D and it will go through the whole focal range at 600 mm trying to lock on. This is with single point AF.

interesting. I only had my 70D for a few weeks and yes once in a while it would hunt but it was not constant hunting. Even with the limiter engage?

 

[chris129]

interesting. I only had my 70D for a few weeks and yes once in a while it would hunt but it was not constant hunting. Even with the limiter engage?

This was focusing on my neighbor's electric meter at 31.5 yards on a tripod using the full focus range. Even when it was focused right on the meter it would sometimes get lost and run through the whole range and still not find it until I backed off a little on the zoom. I think it was a better using multipoint focusing. So mainly a 600 mm single point focus phenomena.

 

[hosesbroadbill]

Focus Limiter

This was focusing on my neighbor's electric meter at 31.5 yards on a tripod using the full focus range. Even when it was focused right on the meter it would sometimes get lost and run through the whole range and still not find it until I backed off a little on the zoom. I think it was a better using multipoint focusing. So mainly a 600 mm single point focus phenomena.

I find that the focus limiter acts very much the same way that the 3.5m and 8.5 switch does on my Canon 400mm f5.6. For birds that are close I put it on full and it focuses every time and never hunts at all. When birds are farther away I put it in on the 15m to infinity and it focuses perfectly. I think it is as good as the Canon. The only time that my lens hunts is when I am focusing on an area with very low contrast (close up in a tree with lots of branches, or trying to lock on a swallow flying over a pond). But my 400mm 5.6 did the same exact thing.

Canon is much faster at locking on focus for BIF. Otherwise I much prefer the Tamron. It locks into focus very quickly and it is just as sharp as the Canon, but much more versatile, with an extra 200mm and VC. I shoot with a 70D.

 

[Roy C]

From a purely optical point of view there is no reason why a cheap(ish) lens like the 150-600 should not get decent image quality - the last big focal length set-up I had was a £300, 600mm astro scope which I used as a prime lens on the 7D, almost always with a 1.4 tc which gave 840mm (1344mm fov on the 1.6 cropper). This set-up was strictly manual focus and on a tripod but the IQ was pretty good for distant birds in nice light. Attached shots were all taken from around 200 feet and cropped heavily. Gives you an idea of IQ even from this cheap set-up

I am not saying this is an alternative to the Tammy but just pointing out that with a cheapish lens like the 150-600 you should still be able to take some nice pics of perched birds even if the AF is not mega.

 

[hosesbroadbill]

Comparison to Tamron

From a purely optical point of view there is no reason why a cheap(ish) lens like the 150-600 should not get decent image quality - the last big focal length set-up I had was a £300, 600mm astro scope which I used as a prime lens on the 7D, almost always with a 1.4 tc which gave 840mm (1344mm fov on the 1.6 cropper). This set-up was strictly manual focus and on a tripod but the IQ was pretty good for distant birds in nice light. Attached shots were all taken from around 200 feet and cropped heavily. Gives you an idea of IQ even from this cheap set-up

I am not saying this is an alternative to the Tammy but just pointing out that with a cheapish lens like the 150-600 you should still be able to take some nice pics of perched birds even if the AF is not mega.

I think the Tamron does better than decent image quality. But I guess we all have a different perspective...

 

[TNarc]

Tamron 150-600

If there was ever any doubt as to the sharpness of the Tamron vs other lenses, check out comparisons here:


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=1


I think it compares very favorably with many other lenses costing much more

 

[Roy C]

I think the Tamron does better than decent image quality. But I guess we all have a different perspective...

Well I was just trying to point out that besides all the shed loads of poor to average shots we are seeing from the lens there is no reason why it should not be that bad in the right hands. Thought I was defending the Tammy by saying there is no reason why it should not be capable of decent images :eek!:
Yes I agree IQ is a subjective thing. Over on POTN there are some very poor images from it IMO and yet some folks are heaping praise on the lens as a result of these poor pics - I guess if they have never used a decent lens or do not know how to take a good pic then it looks good to them - we all have different perspectives as you say.
For the money and focal length offered I still say the Tammy is a decent lens (never thought I would ever say that about a Tamron lens lol).

p.s. I am still having difficulties suggesting to a few friends (who have big whites) that the Tammy looks very good for the money - they just look at me strange and laugh!!!)

 

[Roy C]

If there was ever any doubt as to the sharpness of the Tamron vs other lenses, check out comparisons here:


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=7&APIComp=1


I think it compares very favorably with many other lenses costing much more

Yes, the-digital-picture comparison has come up before in this thread.
It is TDP comparison's that has got me interested in the lens rather than all the mediocre sample images we are seeing posted on the web. I have been using TDP comparison sites for many years and although they are not necessarily always a true reflection of a lens ability it gives you a good starting point.

I have never used a zoom lens for birds myself (prefer primes) but I do know that the TDP comparison of the 100-400 has been a bone of contention for many years, if the lens was that bad they would never have sold any - the general consensus is that they must have used a very poor copy (early samples of the lens suffered badly from copy variations from what I read). I have know a few very good bird photographers over the years who have got some stunning images from the 100-400 so I would not put a lot of trust in TDP comparison's with this lens.

BTW have you seen the TDP comparison of the Sigma 150-500 at 500mm. I know its not a very good lens but surely it cannot be that bad????

 

[TNarc]

Yes, the-digital-picture comparison has come up before in this thread.
It is TDP comparison's that has got me interested in the lens rather than all the mediocre sample images we are seeing posted on the web. I have been using TDP comparison sites for many years and although they are not necessarily always a true reflection of a lens ability it gives you a good starting point.

I have never used a zoom lens for birds myself (prefer primes) but I do know that the TDP comparison of the 100-400 has been a bone of contention for many years, if the lens was that bad they would never have sold any - the general consensus is that they must have used a very poor copy (early samples of the lens suffered badly from copy variations from what I read). I have know a few very good bird photographers over the years who have got some stunning images from the 100-400 so I would not put a lot of trust in TDP comparison's with this lens.

BTW have you seen the TDP comparison of the Sigma 150-500 at 500mm. I know its not a very good lens but surely it cannot be that bad????

I would have to respectfully disagree on your assessment of the canon 100-400 test being faulty, if you go to the comparisons and check out the Tamron 150-600 against the canon 400 mm prime, it compares quite favorably with that lens as well, the same can be done with all the canon lenses so to argue that the 100-400 is somehow not representative of accurate testing can not be justified.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

There's not much in it when comparing the canon 400mm prime to the tamron at the same settings.

I know that the white lens packing guys are not going to want to hear that a non canon non prime lens is going to be extremely close in comparison and weigh less than half of most of those primes, has an equally usable Vibration Compensation making it easily hand holdable, "which for a lot of people including myself who have lugged around a prime with the required tripod and wimberly head," is very desirable.

The bottom line is that the Tamron does produce a very good image at 150-500 mm in comparison with even the primes, but that it even produces an acceptable image at 600mm for a zoom lens is quite an accomplishment, not to mention that it costs so little.

Let me be clear "as some politicians are know to exclaim" I am not for one minute going to claim that the Tamron 150-600 is in any way equal to or even close in sharpness and contrast of the Canon L lenses, they are the benchmark and I will be the first to admit that, I am only saying that it is my opinion from what I have read, as I have not had the opportunity to actually test this lens, that it looks like quite an accomplishment for Tamron and I give them cudos.

I've sold my 300 2.8 prime and 2x converter, "kept the 1.4 for now" and am waiting for the Tamron in nikon mount, no more extenders for me, 420mm is not enough and 600mm with a 2x converter is too soft, not to mention that a "zoom" is very desirable for composition.

Just my opinion from researching this lens for several months and reading all the reviews.

 

[Chosun Juan]

Apart from comparison semantics:
When this beast finally arrives in it's Nikon mount to keep the D7100 company .......
Do I need to use it with a clear filter to protect it ? Which one ?
What about cleaning ? (I'd prefer to do none to minimize risks to the loverly coatings, but I can see some dust etc, eventually finding its way onto the front element .....
What's the experience of most folks ?
What's the reckoning here ?

I'd had to add to any more "soft" photos out there !

What about carrying it - can anyone recommend a good sling (system) ?
TIA



Chosun :gh:

 

[hosesbroadbill]

gear for Tamron

Apart from comparison semantics:
When this beast finally arrives in it's Nikon mount to keep the D7100 company .......
Do I need to use it with a clear filter to protect it ? Which one ?
What about cleaning ? (I'd prefer to do none to minimize risks to the loverly coatings, but I can see some dust etc, eventually finding its way onto the front element .....
What's the experience of most folks ?
What's the reckoning here ?

I'd had to add to any more "soft" photos out there !

What about carrying it - can anyone recommend a good sling (system) ?
TIA



Chosun :gh:

Do not have a filter on mine. Have had no problems with dust yet. What I can recommend is the blackrapid classic strap. That is what I use to hold mine. In addition I use an old shoelace to double support the lens/camera should the clip or anything ever break, the camera will not go crashing to the ground.

 

[TNarc]

Apart from comparison semantics:
When this beast finally arrives in it's Nikon mount to keep the D7100 company .......
Do I need to use it with a clear filter to protect it ? Which one ?
What about cleaning ? (I'd prefer to do none to minimize risks to the loverly coatings, but I can see some dust etc, eventually finding its way onto the front element .....
What's the experience of most folks ?
What's the reckoning here ?

I'd had to add to any more "soft" photos out there !

What about carrying it - can anyone recommend a good sling (system) ?
TIA



Chosun :gh:

I use the Carry Speed FS Slim, a black rapid clone with a unique attachment system

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV-dF838QWg&html5=1



I see that they are being sued by Black Rapid, apparently they are no longer in production, so you may only be able to find them used.

 

[chris129]

Apart from comparison semantics:
When this beast finally arrives in it's Nikon mount to keep the D7100 company .......
Do I need to use it with a clear filter to protect it ? Which one ?
What about cleaning ? (I'd prefer to do none to minimize risks to the loverly coatings, but I can see some dust etc, eventually finding its way onto the front element .....
What's the experience of most folks ?
What's the reckoning here ?

I'd had to add to any more "soft" photos out there !

What about carrying it - can anyone recommend a good sling (system) ?
TIA
Chosun :gh:

I put a 67 mm rubber hood on the end of a 72-67 Fotdiox adapter on a stack of step down rings. It's a little smaller than the stock hood and it might do a better job of keeping out stray light and protecting the front element. You can only do this with crop sensors since they don't use the full front element

 

[Chosun Juan]

Thanks for the responses.

Seems there are not too many filter fans or users out there.....

I've ordered the BlackRapid RS-Sport Extreme Sport Strap, a Vivitar MC clear UV filter (only a cheapie), and I also have the Tokina 12-28mm F4 ATX-Pro ordered, (this comes with Pro-Optic filter kit[3], and a cleaning kit), as well as a creme-de-la-creme 95MB/s Sandisk Memory Card on the way too! So I should be set up with well secured, reasonable lenses, a must be soon to be on borrowed time Nikon D7100, and a variety of pretty optically naff filters! I know they'll probably be next to useless, and that you get what you pay for - but I didn't want to drop ~$200 each yet on more 'name' filters, so we can but try.....

Rang a major camera retailer this morning to see if I could get on their pre-order list for the Tammy. They said deliveries were expected late May, but there were over a 100 pre-orders for the Nikon mount nationally. I didn't like my chances there, even if it comes complete with a JOBY sling strap thrown in, so I'm going to stick with the current retailer and cross my fingers!


Chosun :gh:

 

[Roy C]

]Vivitar MC clear UV filter [/URL](only a cheapie)

That will destroy your IQ for sure - if you absolutely must use a filter then buy the very best you can and even then you will find some image degradation. My advice to anyone with a long lens is do not use a filter but always use the lens hood to afford some sort of protection.

BTW when you get your filter just try taking some controlled shots with and without the filter of a static subject and on a tripod and then look at the images - guaranteed you will ditch the filter.

p.s. your choice of the Black Rapid strap is a good one - I used one to carry a 300/2.8 + tc + 7D (a lot heavier than the Tammy) for years and it worked brilliantly.