# Well what else would I test the Tamron 150-600 on?



## coastalconn

So it was the first outing with the Tamron that arrived yesterday.  I'm holding my thoughts until I do a review in a few days.  I imported into Lightroom, made a few small tweaks, but only default sharpening and no noise reduction.  I could have done more processing, but this was more of a test of the optics.  You can view them bigger on flickr.  They are all in a set here..   https://www.flickr.com/photos/coastalconn/sets/72157644820182203/
Would love to hear your thoughts..  I was about 75-110 feet away from the Ospreys..  I think I had a touch of front focus in the beginning..

1-100% crop


Day 1 Tamron 150-600 wide open at 600  100% crop by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr

2 100% crop 150 yards...


Day 1 Tamron 150-600 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr

3 about 20 feet


Day 1 Tamron 150-600 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr


4 


Day 1 Tamron 150-600 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr

5


Day 1 Tamron 150-600 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr

6


Day 1 Tamron 150-600 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr


----------



## pixmedic

do you have any hot neighbors?


----------



## pjaye

You should come test it in Ontario so I can play with it


----------



## Tyguy35

So in other words you like the Quality of the lens and Sharpness?


----------



## baturn

They all look pretty awesome to me. Especially the 100% crops.


----------



## MSnowy

Looks good. Looks like you had some great light to shoot in there today.


----------



## JacaRanda

I am no expert, but I keep telling people it's a really good lens that goes to great when you consider the price.  Pretty sure I have sold at least 4 or 5 of them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## coastalconn

pixmedic said:


> do you have any hot neighbors?


 dude, creepy   (the answer is no)



Tyguy35 said:


> So in other words you like the Quality of the lens and Sharpness?





baturn said:


> They all look pretty awesome to me. Especially the 100% crops.


I have mixed feelings.  I really like the lens and think it is an exceptional value for what it is.  It made me realized I am quite spoiled by the Sigma 120-300.  Performance wise AF is very good, pretty fast and quiet.  AF accuracy is pretty good too.  It is very light (compared to the 120-300) and easy to handhold all day.  The VC is good, but since the lens is so light it doesn't stabilize the lens like the OS on the Sigma.  For the price point the sharpness is pretty good, slightly better than the 150-500.  I have to shoot with it a few more times before I finalize my decision...


MSnowy said:


> Looks good. Looks like you had some great light to shoot in there today.


Had great light until I shot this swallow that landed behind me in the shade and I was still set for BIF with no limit on Auto-ISO..  LOL.. ISO 20000! on this one..  I didn't even know the D7100 went that high.  I think it is high 1.7 or something silly like that on the LCD...


Day 1 Tamron 150-600 iso 20000 oops by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr


----------



## nzmacro

I was talking to a bird shooter here Kris who has one. How do you find the AF for BIF's compared to the Sigma..... or is that still a bit early to make a conclusion yet ?? Might just be a matter of trying different settings I guess, so that might take time to tell. I agree with Jaca, for the cost it seems a real bargain and it certainly seems pretty darn sharp. 

Fine shots and good timing, Swallows are beautiful Kris and love the Egret doing the splash. The BIF's look great, be interesting with your thoughts on the AF for those when you get it down.

All the best Kris and the extra 100mm will come in handy. Congrats.

Danny.


----------



## JacaRanda

Danny you have me really thinking now.  I have avoided using Wifeys 70d, but I should put the Tampster on it to see if there are any significant differences getting BIF.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## nzmacro

JacaRanda said:


> Danny you have me really thinking now.  I have avoided using Wifeys 70d, but I should put the Tampster on it to see if there are any significant differences getting BIF.



If you can that would be good Jaca. The guy I was talking to was just saying it was not that good for BIF's. But here we are with BIF's from Kris ...... I must check your flickr account again Jaca. Having said that, this guy uses Canon fast lenses as well, so maybe its an F/stop thing with PDAF at F/6.3 (like the old Canon lenses, original versions when used with a 2x TC), I'm not sure to be honest. Maybe its just that he hasn't thrown the right switches or settings, that could well be it and knowing him, it wouldn't surprise me 

All the best and be interesting to know your guys thoughts on it. 

Danny.


----------



## Judobreaker

How do you get that kinds of images on that high ISO? I must be doing something wrong because I seem to lose feather detail a lot more than you when using higher ISO numbers...


----------



## NancyMoranG

Jeepers creeper Kris! And you're still 'wondering' ?..
Nancy


----------



## Radical

Could just be me but the sharpness just doesn't look right, does anybody else see this or is it just me.


----------



## ruifo

Great shots


----------



## MisterMiagi

I need me a lens that gets that close =D


----------



## coastalconn

JacaRanda said:


> Danny you have me really thinking now.  I have avoided using Wifeys 70d, but I should put the Tampster on it to see if there are any significant differences getting BIF.
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I think Tamron has a firmware update that addresses the AF issue on some bodies.  



nzmacro said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> Danny you have me really thinking now.  I have avoided using Wifeys 70d, but I should put the Tampster on it to see if there are any significant differences getting BIF.
> 
> 
> 
> If you can that would be good Jaca. The guy I was talking to was just saying it was not that good for BIF's. But here we are with BIF's from Kris ...... I must check your flickr account again Jaca. Having said that, this guy uses Canon fast lenses as well, so maybe its an F/stop thing with PDAF at F/6.3 (like the old Canon lenses, original versions when used with a 2x TC), I'm not sure to be honest. Maybe its just that he hasn't thrown the right switches or settings, that could well be it and knowing him, it wouldn't surprise me
> All the best and be interesting to know your guys thoughts on it.
> Danny.
Click to expand...

It actually tracks BIF fine as long as there is decent contrast.  The D7100 focuses at F8 so that isn't a problem.  I think there was a glitch with certain Canon bodies.  The 120-300 Tracks much better, but of course there is much more light getting to the AF system at F2.8.


Judobreaker said:


> How do you get that kinds of images on that high ISO? I must be doing something wrong because I seem to lose feather detail a lot more than you when using higher ISO numbers...


Are you talking about the 20K shot?  You have to be really close and not crop, lol...



NancyMoranG said:


> Jeepers creeper Kris! And you're still 'wondering' ?..
> Nancy


Yup, it's not quite the level of Sharpness I was expecting.  I need a few more days with it.  But I can tell it was front focusing a touch.  I didn't adjust it till the end of shooting yesterday..


Radical said:


> Could just be me but the sharpness just doesn't look right, does anybody else see this or is it just me.


I agree 100%, but I also didn't do my normal sharpening.  It is in a different league than the 120-300, but still pretty acceptable sharpness.. Here is one I did some sharpening to..


Day 1 Tamron 150-600 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr




MisterMiagi said:


> I need me a lens that gets that close =D


Here's the thing, everyone thinks they need more reach.  The truth of the matter is you have to still get close and just let the lens be the lens.  This whole post was shot at 300mm on my 120-300..  http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nature-wildlife/360154-colorful-afternoon-pic-heavy.html


----------



## astroNikon

Kris,  you're right .. not up to par.  So I recommend that you quickly Box that lens up and send it to me.
I'll take care of it from this point on.  No problem.


seriously though ... those photos are awesome.  Makes me want to have one and go birding.

I have been looking around at birding places but big birds don't like this area.  
FWIW though, during a soccer game we were visited by turkey buzzards and later some Hawk was flying through being attacked by black bird (diving bombing up and down).


----------



## runnah

I'd be curious to see lower light samples.


----------



## coastalconn

astroNikon said:


> Kris,  you're right .. not up to par.  So I recommend that you quickly Box that lens up and send it to me.
> I'll take care of it from this point on.  No problem.
> 
> 
> seriously though ... those photos are awesome.  Makes me want to have one and go birding.
> 
> I have been looking around at birding places but big birds don't like this area.
> FWIW though, during a soccer game we were visited by turkey buzzards and later some Hawk was flying through being attacked by black bird (diving bombing up and down).


have you checked here?  http://ebird.org/ebird/eBirdReports?cmd=Start



runnah said:


> I'd be curious to see lower light samples.


LOL, did you see the one halfway down the first page at ISO 20000?


----------



## Raj_55555

I was so waiting to look at these pics.. And I agree with runnah, it'd be interesting to see how it performs in low light.


----------



## astroNikon

coastalconn said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kris,  you're right .. not up to par.  So I recommend that you quickly Box that lens up and send it to me.
> I'll take care of it from this point on.  No problem.
> 
> 
> seriously though ... those photos are awesome.  Makes me want to have one and go birding.
> 
> I have been looking around at birding places but big birds don't like this area.
> FWIW though, during a soccer game we were visited by turkey buzzards and later some Hawk was flying through being attacked by black bird (diving bombing up and down).
> 
> 
> 
> have you checked here?  http://ebird.org/ebird/eBirdReports?cmd=Start
Click to expand...


Yes I have checked out that website.  There's not much around here.
There are a few places I'm going to go to per that map.
But myself just seeing turkey buzzards, red tail hawk etc I could double the sightings in this area   lol


----------



## Raj_55555

coastalconn said:


> LOL, did you see the one halfway down the first page at ISO 20000?


I didn't even know that one can shoot at ISO 20000. :meh:


----------



## FITBMX

Those are really sharp looking!


----------



## JacaRanda

nzmacro said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> Danny you have me really thinking now. I have avoided using Wifeys 70d, but I should put the Tampster on it to see if there are any significant differences getting BIF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you can that would be good Jaca. The guy I was talking to was just saying it was not that good for BIF's. But here we are with BIF's from Kris ...... I must check your flickr account again Jaca. Having said that, this guy uses Canon fast lenses as well, so maybe its an F/stop thing with PDAF at F/6.3 (like the old Canon lenses, original versions when used with a 2x TC), I'm not sure to be honest. Maybe its just that he hasn't thrown the right switches or settings, that could well be it and knowing him, it wouldn't surprise me
> 
> All the best and be interesting to know your guys thoughts on it.
> 
> Danny.
Click to expand...


I am actually hoping to meet up with a fellow birdographer to let him borrow the lens. He has also heard of it not being up to par for BIF's. I really want to see how well he and it does because he shoots with a 5d mIII. Being able to adjust focus tracking priority could drive me crazy. Maybe it's better that I stick to what I have and continue hoping for the best. :raisedbrow:


----------



## nzmacro

Thanks Kris and Jaca. I won't annoy you guys about it until you get to try it all. It's always a time thing with new gear and it does take time to settle into it. Jaca has superb sharp shots with it anyway and Kris is getting some great BIF's, so I would still get one if I was going AF for sure. Crazy ISO there Kris 

What Kris said about still needing to get close no matter what focal length is bang on the money. Even if you shoot with a 1200mm, the closer you are the more the fine details show.

All the best and looking great Kris.

Danny.


----------



## Radical

Wow! after sharpening the pic. If that's all it takes I think it will work just fine.


----------



## coastalconn

Here are some more shots.  I tried to get the bird to sit still, but no luck.  Just to give an idea of various focal lengths and sharpness all at F8, next time I will shoot them wide open.... cropped to sorta the same size.. Normal processing here...
300(oops 320)


Tamron at 320 F8 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr
400


Tamron at 400 F8 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr
500


Tamron at 500 F8 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr
600


Tamron at 600 F8 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr

And then another "normally processed" shot...


Osprey in flight by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr


----------



## nzmacro

Gees, nice details in the Swallows Kris. Obviously looking at what you are taking, BIF is not an issue  Brian must be doing something wrong for sure. That last Osprey shot is fantastic ! No nits there at all Kris. Going to be great to watch the progress from here.  I'm looking forward to it.

Danny.


----------

