• 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.

Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 DI IF VC USD (1 Viewer)

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
I was quite happy with the Tamron and the 7D, but I got myself a 7D markII last week and now I am even more impressed.
Peter

Same set up as me. A brother from another mother 3:) I think the two are a great pair and consistently produce very nice, sharp and contrasting images.

But I am still trying to determine if any of the new options out there are better than the Tamron. Meaning the Sigma 150-600 sport or the new Canon 100-400 ii with a 1.4x. Both have pros and cons.

Oh and do you mind sending one of those Curlews over to New York and maybe some nice stroopwafels as well!
 
Last edited:

PeterBird

Well-known member
Same set up as me. A brother from another mother 3:) I think the two are a great pair and consistently produce very nice, sharp and contrasting images.

But I am still trying to determine if any of the new options out there are better than the Tamron. Meaning the Sigma 150-600 sport or the new Canon 100-400 ii with a 1.4x. Both have pros and cons.

Oh and do you mind sending one of those Curlews over to New York and maybe some nice stroopwafels as well!

I must confess I am looking at the new 100-400 with 1.4 as well. If the IQ and speed match the bare Tamron I might be willing to give up a few focus points. I do tend to forget to switch off the IS when I am doing BIF shots every now and then and at least that would be an advantage with the Canon (I think).

I'll gladly swap a few Curlews and stroopwafels for one of your Snowy Owls, so we could have a deal..;)

Peter
 

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
I must confess I am looking at the new 100-400 with 1.4 as well. If the IQ and speed match the bare Tamron I might be willing to give up a few focus points. I do tend to forget to switch off the IS when I am doing BIF shots every now and then and at least that would be an advantage with the Canon (I think).

I'll gladly swap a few Curlews and stroopwafels for one of your Snowy Owls, so we could have a deal..;)

Peter

Could you please explain to me what focus points you would lose at f8 with the 1.4x. If I understand correctly if you have the 1.4x on there then you only have the center point and the 4 surrounding points. Is that correct? If so there are some serious drawbacks with composition. I love how now with the Tamron and the 7dii I have so many points to use. Bird faces right and I aim the point at his eye, bird turns around and I just move the focus point to the other side. I can keep the bird where I want it in the frame. There are countless situations where you would lose the ability to have the whole bird in a frame if you need one of 5 points at the eye.

And you have a deal. As soon as I get my Curlews and Stroopwafels, I will send over a pair of Sonwies for you. Just as a teaser, here they are:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/15977768540/
 
Last edited:

PeterBird

Well-known member
Could you please explain to me what focus points you would lose at f8 with the 1.4x. If I understand correctly if you have the 1.4x on there then you only have the center point and the 4 surrounding points. Is that correct? If so there are some serious drawbacks with composition. I love how now with the Tamron and the 7dii I have so many points to use. Bird faces right and I aim the point at his eye, bird turns around and I just move the focus point to the other side. I can keep the bird where I want it in the frame. There are countless situations where you would lose the ability to have the whole bird in a frame if you need one of 5 points at the eye.

And you have a deal. As soon as I get my Curlews and Stroopwafels, I will send over a pair of Sonwies for you. Just as a teaser, here they are:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/15977768540/
You are absolutely right, Isaac. Losing 'a few focus points' was quite an understatement of mine. With the 1.4 you could indeed only use the centre and surrounding points. On quite a few occasions those are the points I use anyway, but, as you say, there are also many occasions one would miss the other points. So it needs some good thinking...

Lovely shot of the dueling Owls!

Peter
 

PeterBird

Well-known member
I went out for an hour or so today to try some BIF shots.
Peter

1. Tufted Duck
2. Female Goosander
 

Attachments

  • 16193080571_1afccc1011_b.jpg
    16193080571_1afccc1011_b.jpg
    302.9 KB · Views: 144
  • 16194956805_13075bc443_b.jpg
    16194956805_13075bc443_b.jpg
    208.6 KB · Views: 164

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
I went out for an hour or so today to try some BIF shots.
Peter

1. Tufted Duck
2. Female Goosander

Very nice shots. It seems there is always a trade off. The 100-400ii is said to have better IQ at 560mm than the Tamron at 600mm. But at almost 2.5 times the price with the 1.4x, less focus points and 40mm less (not too much I know but there are loads of times when even at 600mm I need to crop quite a bit) that is a fair bit to consider.

The Sigma is in theory the best option of the bunch. Better IQ, the ability to use a 1.4x as well, better weather sealing than the Tamron and the ability to get to 840mm with autofocus is the most appealing to me. But again that has drawbacks. It will also be about 2.5 times the price and also quite a bit heavier. To date, I have not been very impressed with the image quality I have seen from pics. I am hoping that will change as more people slowly get their hands on that lens.
 

the black fox

Well-known member
sadly i don't think it will be me ,the wife has just found out what i have been spending on gear this year and blown a fuse LOL
 

lmans66

Well-known member
Do either of the 600's (Tamron or Sigma) have a true 600 range? Or is it more like 560-570. Has anyone researched this?
 

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
Do either of the 600's (Tamron or Sigma) have a true 600 range? Or is it more like 560-570. Has anyone researched this?

I have read, but no clue where that the Tamron is actually a 600mm. It was in a few reviews. Sorry that is not such a specific answer.
 

the black fox

Well-known member
Do either of the 600's (Tamron or Sigma) have a true 600 range? Or is it more like 560-570. Has anyone researched this?
most zoom lenses from any maker suffer from focus breathing to a degree ,so i would assume your correct in this assumption ,the only way round it is spend a few thousand more pounds/dollars/yen on a 600mm fixed prime .you get what you pay for
 

jimthomson

Well-known member
Do either of the 600's (Tamron or Sigma) have a true 600 range? Or is it more like 560-570. Has anyone researched this?

The digital picture calculated that the Tamron 150- 600mm was really about 570mm, by comparing the angel of view with a canon 600mm prime.

DPreview gives a measured focal length of 152.4-586.5 for the Tamron.
 
Last edited:

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
Love the feather detail on the Junco Isaac - all lovely shots though

Thanks. I agree with the juncos. They are some of my favorite shots I have taken. Small fast moving birds with bright backgrounds is not the easiest of conditions to shoot with. Also laying down on the ice in well below freezing temperatures presents other challenges as well. But the Tamron worked very well and certainly delivers excellent fine feather detail.
 

hoodlum

Well-known member
Very nice shots. It seems there is always a trade off. The 100-400ii is said to have better IQ at 560mm than the Tamron at 600mm. But at almost 2.5 times the price with the 1.4x, less focus points and 40mm less (not too much I know but there are loads of times when even at 600mm I need to crop quite a bit) that is a fair bit to consider.

The Sigma is in theory the best option of the bunch. Better IQ, the ability to use a 1.4x as well, better weather sealing than the Tamron and the ability to get to 840mm with autofocus is the most appealing to me. But again that has drawbacks. It will also be about 2.5 times the price and also quite a bit heavier. To date, I have not been very impressed with the image quality I have seen from pics. I am hoping that will change as more people slowly get their hands on that lens.

There is also the difference in MFD.
 

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
There is also the difference in MFD.

The Canon is surely supposed to be the best at the MFD. But this is not something that I personally worry about too much. It is very rare indeed that I am too close to a bird to focus on it, even at 150mm. But I guess that is a great feature for photographing dragon flies, butterflies, etc.
 

hosesbroadbill

Well-known member
Some work from the weekend with the Tamron with some small quick moving birds. Shots are not ideal as I was in a car (only way to get close without spooking the birds) but I think shots are indicative of the kind of details attainable with close subjects and nice light.

500mm @ f8
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16128811689/in/photostream/

500mm @ f8
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16129050157/in/photostream/

500mm @f8
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16128780247/in/photostream/

600mm @f8
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16127224298/in/photostream/

500mm @ f8
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/16314861955/in/photostream/

All shots hand held and processed in DPP. In case anyone cares, all shots were with auto white balance, no saturation added (I actually took away some color on the male Cardinals). Shadows were brought up a bit to try and compensate for the harsh shadows due to the fact that I could not line myself up properly with the birds and the sun as there was a bush in the way. Sharpening to level 5 for those that use DPP and most shots has contrast set to 4 or 8. And all are cropped as well.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top