That's my thinking...... it would be a great telezoom duo with the 70-200.
New Tamron 150-600mm f5-6.3
- Thread starter BackdoorArts
- Start date
That's my thinking...... it would be a great telezoom duo with the 70-200.
Scott Murray
Senior Member
Scott Murray
Senior Member
It actually seems 'Too Cheap'...I can't wait for you guys to get one so we can see how good it is!
Good, we should see some user reviews soon from the Canon shooters, they always seem to be the test subjects
Yea, I think i would handle one in a shop before buying.
That's what I'm concerned about as well. If it follows in the same vein as the Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC then it could be a decent gem. I'm hoping that it performs better than the Siggy 150-500 OS (my current reach out and touch someone lens).
Here is a link to a Tamron 150-600 review that was released some 8 hours ago. Review is by Frank Wong, you have to follow some links, it's from a Canon copy and the translation is rough. The last page of the 4 or 5 pages has sample photos that look promising.
Tamron SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC Review « Canon Rumors
Tamron SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC Review « Canon Rumors
Last edited:
dramtastic
Senior Member
I won't be trading in the Siggy 100-300mm F4 with 1.4TC any time soon on those examples. Except for the first image not particularly sharp and tons of grain in most shots. I would suggest that in the first shot, the sharpest, the subject was relatively close. Unfortunately with a lot of reviews on super telephoto's, there is no indication of how far the subject is away which is incredibly important to know. Is the thing sharp at 600mm with the subject 50 meters away, or is it sharp at 600mm with the subject 150 meters away. After all, isn't this why anyone wants to have that sort of reach. Jury will be out for a while for mine.
The only conclusion possible from those samples is its worth keeping an open mind,for now any way
Yes, given the reach/specs of the lens and the price point. I'd say it has a 30% of being on par with the Siggy 150-500, a 60% chance of being supbar, and a 10% chance of outperforming. I'd obviously like to see the latter. I'm hoping this kind of competition will breed better glass at lower prices.
I haven't owned a Tamron lens since my days with Canon in the 90's, so I really don't know much about them. I hope they're aggressively trying to set a tone for the other lens makers to innovate.
I haven't owned a Tamron lens since my days with Canon in the 90's, so I really don't know much about them. I hope they're aggressively trying to set a tone for the other lens makers to innovate.
Here are some more photos, with a Canon 5D mk111. Some of them look OK, most are at 600mm (582mm in reality) and wide open.
I downloaded one and had a play with it in Aperture and with the NIK tools, I think I got it looking a bit better, cleaned up the noise at least.
If you click on the photo it opens to full size.
Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD ????????????? - DCFever.com
I downloaded one and had a play with it in Aperture and with the NIK tools, I think I got it looking a bit better, cleaned up the noise at least.
If you click on the photo it opens to full size.
Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD ????????????? - DCFever.com
dramtastic
Senior Member
582 mm but from what distance Brad? 5ft, 10ft, 400ft? I could give you pretty sharp images on a half decent body with a basic kit lens at the maximum focal length of said lens over short distances. Anyway blah blah I'm a born sceptic, I just know by now your going to buy one so look forward to your personal review and examples(maybe a tack sharp imager of a sparrow in flight from 100 meters at 582mm wide open).
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
It's so hard to judge performance based on those photos. I'm assuming the "RAW to jpg" shots are all uncropped, sooc. What I find interesting is that on the longest reach, most radical crop (last photo) he chose an image shot at f/10 and ISO 6400, while the rest were at max aperture, f/6.3. So you're compromising my ability to judge sharpness by introducing all that noise. Did you not give us an example at f/6.3 because you couldn't get one in sharp focus at that distance? Regardless, it seems to be a decent lens, but nothing brilliant. Having lived with my Sigma 150-500mm for almost 3 years now I'm not seeing anything here that is in any way sharper than what I get out of it. At best these shots are "as good", but that comparison is drawn against no images from other lenses on the same sensor, just my own images against Nikon sensors.
If I learned anything from the review it's that I'd much rather have a D610 at 2/3 the price than the 5D Mk iii, if only for high ISO.
If I learned anything from the review it's that I'd much rather have a D610 at 2/3 the price than the 5D Mk iii, if only for high ISO.
582 mm but from what distance Brad? 5ft, 10ft, 400ft? I could give you pretty sharp images on a half decent body with a basic kit lens at the maximum focal length of said lens over short distances. Anyway blah blah I'm a born sceptic, I just know by now your going to buy one so look forward to your personal review and examples(maybe a tack sharp imager of a sparrow in flight from 100 meters at 582mm wide open).
I am still on the fence as to what I will buy Brian, if this lens turns out to be better than the Sigma zooms and the price is not much more than what I can buy a 50-500 Sigma for, I might end up with one. But that decision wont be made until I see some "real" independent reviews and comparisons.
I still havent ruled out the Nikon 300 f4 +1.4TC yet also. The thing with this option that is making me hesitate, is the lack of convenience being a fixed focal length, and no VR.
Back to the above photos, your right, we dont know a lot about them, a couple look to have a bit of distance between lens and subject while others are obviously quite close. And we dont know what has been done to those jpegs, they look like they could be straight out of camera to me. I got a noticeable improvement with a bit of PP on the one I had a play with. I am sure with RAW files from my D7100 I could do a lot better.
Last edited:
dramtastic
Senior Member
I for one actually do hope it's a bargain winner. Problem is, I wasn't even that impressed with the promo shots supplied by Tamron and that's saying something. As for fixed vs variable focal length, it's one of the reasons I went with the Sigma 100-300mm F4 over the Nikon 300mm F4. If you check out Flickr and look through images of the latter two you will see a lot of bird shots taken with the Nikon 300mm F4. Of coarse that is to be expected. If you scroll through images taken with the Sigma 100-300mm F4 you will see a real mix of shots. Great bird/wildlife shots of coarse, but also sports, landscapes, street, architecture even portraits. Versatility, I like it.
Yes, so do I. I like the thought of having that focal range, even so, I think the majority of my shots would be 500mm+.
Once I get a long lens, I will probably sell my 70-300, and look at getting a 70-200, either Tamron or Sigma 2.8, or Nikon f4.
pictaker64
Senior Member
Nothing there impresses me,was and am truly hoping it will be a decent lens,I will wait to see how some of the pros here feel about it before diving in,but it is on the list,would be great to get some distance and with a Tc 1.4 and cropped frame you could really push it out,but again,if the pics are crap,then no sense buying...the sigma 150-500 has alot goin for it,I see the pics everyday here or flickr and it can take a pic...fingers crossed for a decent lens