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

I can`t speak for images with such a small resolution. Give me full size.
For FF camera seems bad. You will get better shots with 70d/400 5.6 than 5d3 and 600/8.

For example:

http://500px.com/photo/62731085/woo...reola-by-veselin-gramatikov?from=user_library

On crop camera with 600mm you will need really tripod and good light and slow moving subject to get something....

Most of the people just say...wow it`s 900mm equv great. On the field nobody need 900mm lens. Most of super telephoto lenses above 500mm are used with FF cameras not crop. There is very big distance between the camera and the subject with crop and 900mm equiv. As i say this is usable only for small birds/subjects and close distances (when used with crop camera). For general bird photography and don`t think that many users will use this lens at 150-250mm range. More used will be 300-500 so the important think is not that the lens have reach...but if this lens are better enough at 300-500mm.
Who cares about 600 when you can not take good shot wide open at 400mm??? I prefer wide open quality without IS not IS with 600mm/f8.0. This is not reliable on the field !!!

To All,

I agree with Vgramatikov about one of the Tammy's strengths being photographing small birds at close range (also stationary objects such as flowers etc). However that still needs good light, as small birds are rarely still for long, necessitating high shutter speeds, and I feel stopping down to f7.1, f8 or 9? even on crop cameras to get the whole 3-D body of the bird in focus for sharpness.

BIF's seem more difficult again, and the image does seem to deteriorate with distance - is this purely a function of atmospheric disturbance? and what part does increased 'shake' distance traversed out yonder play percentage wise? What are the effects of the VC on this?

My question to owners and users of the Tammy is:- Is it possible to get pin sharp images with the VC on? At what point is it beneficial to photograph without it? (lets assume 600mm and f8 and ISO as low as light will allow to keep it simple)


Chosun :gh:

PS. How much would post processing salvage the images I posted above - or are they just soft?

PPS. Personally, I'm thrilled to be toting around 1150mm equivalent of lens (1.3x D7100 in-camera crop, and real focal lengths and multipliers factored in

I have VC always on and have no trouble at all getting sharp images at various distances

Vgramatikov said:

Who cares about 600 when you can not take good shot wide open at 400mm??? I prefer wide open quality without IS not IS with 600mm/f8.0. This is not reliable on the field !!!

Click to expand...

That might be fine for you but for most folk that I know would not go along with that unless they shoot from close distances in a hide - they would obviously only get the Tamron if they needed more than 400mm. Maybe you are just not good/experienced enough to get the best out of the Tamron a good photographer works with the tools he has got and if that means stopping down then so be it, besides when you are on a tripod then losing a stop of light or two is no big deal.
Looking at a lot of your shots they are taken with small focal lengths so maybe you can get a lot nearer than me or most people I know, if that is the case then you will do a lot better with a 300/2.8 IS Mk11 + 1.4x tc then you ever will with the 400/5.6.

As far as web size images go you are quick at rubbishing web size images from the Tamron but when they are sharp you say it means nothing :-O. Besides it is not everyone who needs or wants to make big prints.

I will continue to use both the Tammy and the 400/5.6 and I may even get another 300/2.8 IS but this time it will be the MkII. If you are that displeased with the Tamron I do not know why you are even bothering with it or are you just another person who takes delight in rubbishing everyone else kit except your own!!!

Chosun Juan said:

BIF's seem more difficult again, and the image does seem to deteriorate with distance - is this purely a function of atmospheric disturbance? and what part does increased 'shake' distance traversed out yonder play percentage wise? What are the effects of the VC on this?

My question to owners and users of the Tammy is:- Is it possible to get pin sharp images with the VC on? At what point is it beneficial to photograph without it? (lets assume 600mm and f8 and ISO as low as light will allow to keep it simple)

Click to expand...

There is not a lens in the world where IQ does not deteriorate with distance, often this is very much to do with "atmospheric disturbance" as you say, this even effects the very best/most expensive Canon super teles. In general prime lenses will always be better than zooms although the Canon 200-400/560 is not bad :-O

As far as VC goes I switch it off when shooting birds in flight or when shooting on a tripod myself. I only use VC when hand holding at slow(ish) shutter speeds. For birds in-flight you should be using a fast shutter speed so there is not benefit whatsoever in using VC. I used to keep IS on all the when I had a 300/2.8 IS but with the Tammy (which as only got one VC mode) I find it slows the AF speed down and the image tends to jump a fair bit when the VC kicks in. Although the VC is effective at around 3 stops it is not as smooth as the latest Canon lenses IMO.

If you are hand holding it depends on your technique but at 600mm I would be looking for 1/1600 sec + for birds in flight - at these shutter speeds the VC become a waste of time and is more of an hindrance than help IMO - besides the Tammy does not have a panning mode and will not help with a moving target.

Roy,

No. The tamron is interesting lens for me (The new sigma too).

Just what i wish is to be as sharp as 400 5.6L and nice at 600.
But unfortunately this is not the case.

I`ll test the tammy next week so we will see. If this lens is comparable with my 400/5.6 good! May be i`ll get one. If not i`ll wait for the sigma`s reviews. Seems the sigma will be better when wide open. Witch is critical for such a slow tool. We`ll see. :t:

Big prints? Yes i need them because i sell my photography and i need good quality. So far if i do not need big prints and i do not care about the IQ what we are doing here discussing lens iQ? B

What is the close focus distance on the Tammy 150-600 at 600mm Roy?

As you know the Canon 400mm isn't the best lens for close focusing on butterflies and large dragonflies.

Vgramatikov said:

Perfectly usable for web and smaller prints but maybe not so much for large prints A3+ and if you are in stock or other photo sales industry.

Click to expand...

Hello Vgramatikov,

If i was in stock or other photo sales industry as you say, I would only buy a "professional" lens

But since I'm an amature and I don't earn anything from this, web and smaller prints is all I need and I suspect that's what most of us in this forum need as well.

MiguelM,

Yes of course :t: This is simply true. But nowadays seems it become easier to get pro quality with cheaper lens. 400 5.6L is one of the best lenses for the money so far. But it`s quite old lens no IS and little slow.

May be if somebody try to make cheap 400/4 IS prime will be far better than cheap 150-600 lens. And it will be better with 1.4TC.

But this is not the case...and may be will never be. B

We`ll see next week with my extended tamron test. And after this with the new sigma reviews.

Shaggy2070 said:

What is the close focus distance on the Tammy 150-600 at 600mm Roy?

As you know the Canon 400mm isn't the best lens for close focusing on butterflies and large dragonflies.

Click to expand...

MFD is 2.7mtrs 'shaggy'.

A few more images

Some more images from the weekend, had to use ISO800 on the 7D due to the quite poor light, so clearly losing some definition when cropping, and its quite clear that this lens needs lots of light to be able to focus. All taken hand-held and all about 20-25 feet away. As expected really, the more I can fill the frame the better, but I am finding focus can be difficult to nail even close in - especially with these waders that feed like little sowing machines, but probably still mainly down to my technicue, or lack of!!

Also worth bearing in mind thats its not mandatory to fill the frame for a great bird photograph; just how many pin sharp facing left/facing right frame fillers of any bird do people need?Consider better compositional efforts if distance limited.
Russ

Vgramatikov said:

Roy,

No. The tamron is interesting lens for me (The new sigma too).

Just what i wish is to be as sharp as 400 5.6L and nice at 600.
But unfortunately this is not the case.

I`ll test the tammy next week so we will see. If this lens is comparable with my 400/5.6 good! May be i`ll get one. If not i`ll wait for the sigma`s reviews. Seems the sigma will be better when wide open. Witch is critical for such a slow tool. We`ll see. :t:

Big prints? Yes i need them because i sell my photography and i need good quality. So far if i do not need big prints and i do not care about the IQ what we are doing here discussing lens iQ? B

Click to expand...

What I said was not everyone wants big prints or are even interested in selling their images. I have sold a few on 500 px and also via Getty images but mostly I give my images away to my County bird group for their magazines - I am not in trying to sell images at my age ,I just do it as a enjoyable hobby like a lot of folk.

If you are at all serious about trying to sell images then you should be using a super tele prime and not looking at cheap consumer lenses from third party manufactures. I have probably taken over 100,000 shots with a 400/5.6 and like the lens a lot but even this lens is not a serious player for most professional photographers except perhaps for the occasional bird in flight.

You are completely wasting your time if you think for one minute that a cheap zoom lens like the Tamron 150-600 can compete with a prime lens wide open. I say again most folk buy the Tammy because they want more focal length than 400mm and are not particularity interested in in printing big . As you have already stated that you do not want more than 400mm so why even bother looking at the lens?

I am sure that the new Sigma will be better than the Tammy as it has a fluorite glass and weighs much heavier than the Tammy but why are you interested in this lens as the 500/4 IS mkII is around the same weight and most certainly would be a better lens.

By the way you keep saying that the Tammy is poor and yet you then say that you are going to test it next week! If you have not tried it for yourself how do you come to your conclusions seeing that you pay so little regard to web sized images?

Whenever I read opinions by someone that I do not know the first thing I do is to look at their images to see how much weight I will give to their opinions, if there images impress me then I am all for listening to them but in your case I am afraid that in my opinion a lot of the shots you have put up on 500px are not top standard and I would be amazed if anyone actually bought them but if you say you are selling the then the best of luck to you, you should be able to afford a super tele with all the money you are getting

cgilbert said:

Some more images from the weekend, had to use ISO800 on the 7D due to the quite poor light, so clearly losing some definition when cropping, and its quite clear that this lens needs lots of light to be able to focus. All taken hand-held and all about 20-25 feet away. As expected really, the more I can fill the frame the better, but I am finding focus can be difficult to nail even close in - especially with these waders that feed like little sowing machines, but probably still mainly down to my technicue, or lack of!!

Click to expand...

Some nice images there Cliff :t: You are right about these busy little waders that are always on the move. For what it is worth I always shoot in AI servo mode (even for static birds) and this helps if the bird is moving. To help with using AI servo I also use back button focusing but that is a discussion for another day.

Tarsiger said:

Also worth bearing in mind thats its not mandatory to fill the frame for a great bird photograph; just how many pin sharp facing left/facing right frame fillers of any bird do people need?Consider better compositional efforts if distance limited.
Russ

Click to expand...

Yep, you are right there Russ, most folk (including myself) crop too hard to try and get frame fillers whereas a losser crop can make for a more pleasing image.

Roy C said:

Yep, you are right there Russ, most folk (including myself) crop too hard to try and get frame fillers whereas a losser crop can make for a more pleasing image.

Click to expand...

Also guilty of this but trying to consider more bird in habitat shots, being limited to 400mm and with neither money nor enthusiasm for heavier kit nor the need to sell images.Best wishes.
Russ

Tarsiger said:

Also guilty of this but trying to consider more bird in habitat shots, being limited to 400mm and with neither money nor enthusiasm for heavier kit nor the need to sell images.Best wishes.
Russ

Click to expand...

I go through different phases Russ, sometimes for a month or two I do images where the bird is small in frame with more habitat and then I start doing images where the bird is big and ugly in the frame :-C .
It is strange that on a lot of forums where the bird is big in the frame it always seems to get the most attention and yet if you go on a critique forum where there are some really good photographers then they will always go for a looser crop. Like you I have no need to sell images nor the enthusiasm for heavy kit these days besides I am a weakling pensioner |=(| . BTW I had not done any bird photography for over eighteen mouths up to when I bought the 400/5.6 and Tammy 150-600 a few months ago - trying to rekindle my enthusiasm but it is hard work!

Roy,

Thank you.
May you should try first to do something good and after this maybe you opinion will have matter for me. If we`ll speak in that line...?!

You buy the tamron and every body who tells that the lens have negatives have to go away and be a pro and buy some 10.000$ lens.

As you may know here in my country the standart is very poor. So for us is very hard to afford expensive lenses. That why i look in to these.

I search for best value not for best lens. Seems tamy is good but have drawbacks. I think it is clear that this is the best x4 zoom and even we do not mention the price.

But when i comment the negatives pls do not try to tell me who i am and what i am because this is not the conversation we do here.

Nothing to say anymore in this thread.

Good luck.

As I promised, I'd post some shots with the 150-600 on my Sony body when I got the lens - I received it today when I got home from work, and though it was very late with failing light and I only had my backyard for test subjects, I did snap a handful of shots just to test the lens and make sure it wasn't damaged in shipping, was aligned, that focus was accurate on my body and didn't require any adjustments, etc. I tested two specific things in my yard - wide-open aperture (F5) at 150mm to test the wide end performance, and wide-open aperture (F6.3) at the 600mm end to test that performance (which admittedly is the part that's most important to me). As a general caveat for my tests - I owned the lens exactly 8 minutes when I took these, I could only photograph what was available in my backyard at 6:30pm, I shot only in JPG, straight from camera, handheld, and these are unedited, and because of the lower light, I had to raise the ISO quite a bit at the long end so the shots are at ISO1000 and 1600. Still, I was able to confirm the lens seems all OK and to spec, and the performance just in these first tests looks very good to my eye. The shots linked below are all posted at full size, from-camera JPGs with no editing...go to the link for each image, then click 'original' just under the photo to see the full size:

150mm F5:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3702150612/photos/3020135/tamron-150-600-first-tests-041

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3702150612/photos/3020134/tamron-150-600-first-tests-035

600mm F6.3:
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3702150612/photos/3020133/tamron-150-600-first-tests-029

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3702150612/photos/3020132/tamron-150-600-first-tests-001

Once I get to the weekend, I'll have a lot more opportunity in good light, and a lot more birds and wildlife to choose from...but I wanted to share the very first shots as I promised I would for those waiting for Sony-body examples.

Chosun Juan said:

Yes Vespo. I've had mine for a couple of months, but had to wait 3 months prior to that while it was on order. Still learning the ropes on a Nikon D7100.

Good light and close distances / atmospheric clarity seem to be the key.

Chosun :gh:

Click to expand...

yep, thats my experience to,
it's all about the light and distance,
early mornings and late evenings
that's when the magic happens,
o

----
"If your photographs aren't good enough, you're not close enough."
Robert Capa