# Will Tamron set the bar for a budget wildlife lens?



## coastalconn (Nov 7, 2013)

Has anyone seen the Tamron press release about the Tamron 150-600?  A bold prediction from me, this lens will smoke the Sigmas and possibly the Nikon 80-400 and the Canon 100-400 for a rumored $1500!  I had the Tamon 200-500 and it was pretty darn good except for being a screw drive lens and not having VC (VR/IS).  The new Tamron lens will address these issues and even add a focus limiter.  I'm not an expert at MTF charts, but it looks like they are pretty good except for the contrast fall-off..  Tamron Europe:SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 VC USD[cam]=&tx_keproducts_pi6[vc]=false&tx_keproducts_pi6[sp]=false
I'm sure someone here can spread some knowledge about them, but it looks to me like the lens is optimized more for the 600mm end...

I don't think I will be trading my Sigma 120-300 in anytime soon, but I think it is great that Sigma and Tamron are really stating to step it up with their newest lenses.  I know all the old school people out there hate Sigma and Tamron and brush them off, but I think times are changing...


----------



## dxqcanada (Nov 7, 2013)

Yeah looks good.
My wife got the 200-500mm (based on your comments) and it is a good performer ... and I was hunting for one myself. Now that this one is out, I think I will dig for some more cash as it looks good on paper. Though I still wish for a slightly faster lens.


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 7, 2013)

coastalconn said:


> Has anyone seen the Tamron press release about the Tamron 150-600?  A bold prediction from me, this lens will smoke the Sigmas and possibly the Nikon 80-400 and the Canon 100-400 for a rumored $1500!  I had the Tamon 200-500 and it was pretty darn good except for being a screw drive lens and not having VC (VR/IS).  The new Tamron lens will address these issues and even add a focus limiter.  I'm not an expert at MTF charts, but it looks like they are pretty good except for the contrast fall-off..  Tamron Europe:SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 VC USD[cam]=&tx_keproducts_pi6[vc]=false&tx_keproducts_pi6[sp]=false
> I'm sure someone here can spread some knowledge about them, but it looks to me like the lens is optimized more for the 600mm end...
> 
> I don't think I will be trading my Sigma 120-300 in anytime soon, but I think it is great that Sigma and Tamron are really stating to step it up with their newest lenses.  I know all the old school people out there hate Sigma and Tamron and brush them off, but I think times are changing...



95 mm filters.. lol - this thing must be a monster.


----------



## coastalconn (Nov 7, 2013)

dxqcanada said:


> Yeah looks good.
> My wife got the 200-500mm (based on your comments) and it is a good performer ... and I was hunting for one myself. Now that this one is out, I think I will dig for some more cash as it looks good on paper. Though I still wish for a slightly faster lens.


I still think the Tamron 200-500 is a great lens.  I don't think will actually be released for 9-10 months so you have lots of time to save  



robbins.photo said:


> 95 mm filters.. lol - this thing must be a monster.


LOL, that's small, the Sigma has 105 filter and the Tokina has 112mm filter.  Also at 4 pounds the Tamron is a super lightweight.  My sigma is 6.5 (7 with the 2x) pounds by comparison! ...
I've seen some people complaining about the 4 pound weight already and it makes me laugh!  It is a 600mm lens after all.  The 200-500 was only a touch over 3 if I remember correctly


----------



## lonewolfsx (Nov 8, 2013)

In my personal opinion, people complaining about lens size and weight are a joke. If I'm going somewhere where I need to image quality increase from my iPhone's camera to my DSLR, I don't care if I have to lug around a 10 pound lens or two as long as my images are of the utmost perfect quality. Granted, I'm young and in good shape so I don't have issues carrying stuff all day. Still, I wish manufacturers would keep the weight savings stuff to the consumer lenses and just let the pro lenses be god awful heavy if it means better image quality, and many of my "tog" friends agree with me in this area.

That was off-topic, but now on topic: this new lens does look very nice. I've always been a fan of Sigma's nicer lenses, they are great price/performance, especially used, and they offer some lenses that nobody else does. Tamron had some pretty awesome lenses before, such as the 28-105 f/2.8... I look forward to these third party manufacturers continuing to build high quality glass as it'll either force camera-brand lenses to come down in price or go up in quality... always good for us (consumers).

150-600... wow and f/6.3 while not great is still very respectable at that kind of length. If the quality is even half decent this could be great, though I'm not sure quite what market they're shooting for.


----------



## gsgary (Nov 8, 2013)

Give me a 600 prime every day of the week

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## sm4him (Nov 8, 2013)

Yeah, I saw this yesterday. If the price really does end up being in the $1500 range, and this thing gets good reviews, I'd definitely consider selling my Sigma 150-500 and going with the Tamron lens.  Once it's actually out, I'll be reading with great interest what reviewers and early adapters have to say about it.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 8, 2013)

nice lens.

Weight doesn't bug me

Try carrying around a telescope whose tripod is heavier than all my lenses and camera put together.


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 8, 2013)

lonewolfsx said:


> In my personal opinion, people complaining about lens size and weight are a joke. If I'm going somewhere where I need to image quality increase from my iPhone's camera to my DSLR, I don't care if I have to lug around a 10 pound lens or two as long as my images are of the utmost perfect quality. Granted, I'm young and in good shape so I don't have issues carrying stuff all day. Still, I wish manufacturers would keep the weight savings stuff to the consumer lenses and just let the pro lenses be god awful heavy if it means better image quality, and many of my "tog" friends agree with me in this area.
> 
> That was off-topic, but now on topic: this new lens does look very nice. I've always been a fan of Sigma's nicer lenses, they are great price/performance, especially used, and they offer some lenses that nobody else does. Tamron had some pretty awesome lenses before, such as the 28-105 f/2.8... I look forward to these third party manufacturers continuing to build high quality glass as it'll either force camera-brand lenses to come down in price or go up in quality... always good for us (consumers).
> 
> 150-600... wow and f/6.3 while not great is still very respectable at that kind of length. If the quality is even half decent this could be great, though I'm not sure quite what market they're shooting for.



Well for me it's a tradeoff calculation.  I do a lot of hiking sometimes to get the pics I want, so I have to decide is the extra weight/size going to be worth the extra range, and how does the IQ stack up against my current 300 mm?  The 4 lb weight on this is pretty impressive for a 600 mm reach - but of course that usually means some compromises in build quality to use the lighter weight material.  Like all things camera, you can't have everything.  So I'll wait till they come out and some of the places I count on for such things have a chance to review it and test the Image quality, then if those results are promising and the price is right I'll probably look at purchasing one.  So far though it looks like a very impressive offering.


----------



## lambertpix (Nov 8, 2013)

Wow.  Definitely worth watching.  I've been pretty impressed with the pace that Sigma, especially, has been pumping out new lenses -- and lots of them have been getting very solid reviews.  Canon's 100-400 could really stand a little competition -- I can't wait to see some reviews.


----------



## sm4him (Nov 8, 2013)

robbins.photo said:


> Well for me it's a tradeoff calculation.  I do a lot of hiking sometimes to get the pics I want, so I have to decide is the extra weight/size going to be worth the extra range, and how does the IQ stack up against my current 300 mm?  The 4 lb weight on this is pretty impressive for a 600 mm reach - *but of course that usually means some compromises in build quality to use the lighter weight material.*  Like all things camera, you can't have everything.  So I'll wait till they come out and some of the places I count on for such things have a chance to review it and test the Image quality, then if those results are promising and the price is right I'll probably look at purchasing one.  So far though it looks like a very impressive offering.



^THIS is much more my concern than the weight. I'm used to lugging my Sigma 150-500 on a gripped D7000 around, even on all-day hiking excursions, so the weight of this new Tamron would actually make my load *lighter.*  But if the lighter weight is the result of serious compromises in build quality, and the IQ isn't *significantly* better than what I get now, then I'd stick with my Sigma.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 8, 2013)

Looks like it's optimized for the image circle of APS-C more than FX, which would make sense; Nikon's 70-200/2.8 VR was the same way--best on APS-C, not FX. Looks like a lotta lens for the money in terms of range and zoom, but the f/6.3 end of the deal both keeps the price,size,and weight down, but also hurts performance potential in marginal lighting conditions. But still--if they can deliver it to market in the $1500 range, I don't think there's much competition from anything else in that kind of offering.


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 8, 2013)

sm4him said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > Well for me it's a tradeoff calculation. I do a lot of hiking sometimes to get the pics I want, so I have to decide is the extra weight/size going to be worth the extra range, and how does the IQ stack up against my current 300 mm? The 4 lb weight on this is pretty impressive for a 600 mm reach - *but of course that usually means some compromises in build quality to use the lighter weight material.* Like all things camera, you can't have everything. So I'll wait till they come out and some of the places I count on for such things have a chance to review it and test the Image quality, then if those results are promising and the price is right I'll probably look at purchasing one. So far though it looks like a very impressive offering.
> ...



I know what you mean.  At the moment I'm working with a 70-300 mm Nikon lens, it's been getting the job done so far but I'm still trying to decide if I'll get more bang for my buck out of the next lens with something faster (F/2.8 200 mm zoom) or something with more reach (Originally I was looking at either a 400 mm or 500 mm lens).  I can see advantages to both, and eventually I'd like to have both but my progression back into the world of cameras is going to be a matter of slowly and steady rebuilding my equipment list.


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 13, 2013)

Holy crappola!  $1069 in the US market.  I can't believe this is hitting the market at such a low price... Availibilty inthe next month!


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 13, 2013)

robbins.photo said:


> I know what you mean.  At the moment I'm working with a 70-300 mm Nikon lens, it's been getting the job done so far but I'm still trying to decide if I'll get more bang for my buck out of the next lens with something faster (F/2.8 200 mm zoom) or something with more reach (Originally I was looking at either a 400 mm or 500 mm lens).  I can see advantages to both, and eventually I'd like to have both but my progression back into the world of cameras is going to be a matter of slowly and steady rebuilding my equipment list.




The 70-200 can't beat the 70-300 at the 300mm end, even with a Nikon TC.  Been there, tried that.


----------



## robbins.photo (Dec 13, 2013)

480sparky said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > I know what you mean.  At the moment I'm working with a 70-300 mm Nikon lens, it's been getting the job done so far but I'm still trying to decide if I'll get more bang for my buck out of the next lens with something faster (F/2.8 200 mm zoom) or something with more reach (Originally I was looking at either a 400 mm or 500 mm lens).  I can see advantages to both, and eventually I'd like to have both but my progression back into the world of cameras is going to be a matter of slowly and steady rebuilding my equipment list.
> ...



Well curiously enough I just purchased a 70-200 - but my desire for it was not based on the maximum focal length of 200 mm but rather it's aperture of F/2.8.  I won't be using a teleconverter with it, but for my daughters sports stuff indoors and to walk around some of the places at the local zoo such as the Lied Jungle or the Desert Dome where the lighting conditions can get pretty poor rather quickly, I think it will end up being a very good addition to my bag.

As it so happens I got a deal that was way, way to good to pass up.  The lens is a Sigma with the OS feature, and my winning bid was $721.50.  Couldn't walk away from a deal like that, in fact I'm still pinching myself wondering how on earth a lens like that went that cheap on Ebay.  But sometimes you just get lucky I guess.


----------



## 18.percent.gary (Dec 13, 2013)

coastalconn said:


> Holy crappola!  $1069 in the US market.  I can't believe this is hitting the market at such a low price... Availibilty inthe next month!



Yup, my whole thought proccess about my next lens purchase just got kicked in the ding-ding. Now I'll just have to wait for the early adopters to get to work and report back to us....


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 14, 2013)

18.percent.gary said:


> coastalconn said:
> 
> 
> > Holy crappola!  $1069 in the US market.  I can't believe this is hitting the market at such a low price... Availibilty inthe next month!
> ...



Lol, mine too. . Just when I thought i was all set.. I'm sure it will be sharper than the 200-500 (which was pretty darn sharp) add fast AF, a focus limiter and VC and this lens is a no brainer..  I will be an early adopter for sure at that price point!


----------



## nmoody (Dec 14, 2013)

Looks like I may have the opportunity to pick up a cheap Sigma =)


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 14, 2013)

nmoody said:


> Looks like I may have the opportunity to pick up a cheap Sigma =)


Lol not my 120-300.. thats a keeper.  I will probably flip the 150 500 that should be arriving today


----------



## minicoop1985 (Dec 14, 2013)

Now, I don't have the experience or expertise to really comment on the absolute image quality from Tamron, but I do know about build quality. I've been able to spend some time with some Tamron products (friend has a 70-200 or something like that my wife borrows for Sony, tried a few manual lenses) from varying time periods. I will say that their overall build quality is quite impressive these days compared to their manual old school stuff. The Sigmas I've played with leave me with the same feeling-the old Sigma Canon EF and Minolta AF mount stuff feels like junk compared to what they put out now. Very impressed with the direction these companies are going through build quality alone. Hopefully the optics are as nice as the rest...


----------



## Overread (Dec 14, 2013)

I wonder if its a true 600mm. I know that some of the Sigma 500mm zooms have been rated closer to 450mm at most normal shooting distances. Even if its only up to 550mm its an impressive range in a zoom and will be interesting to see how it performs - it could certainly prove to be a very decent and affordable wildlife lens.


----------



## rhodeislandhntr (Dec 14, 2013)

something i might need to expand my options taking better outdoor pics


----------



## baturn (Dec 14, 2013)

I too will be watching for feedback on this lens and perhaps have a 150 - 500 for sale.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 14, 2013)

Price of the new Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD lens: $1069 | Nikon Rumors

Tamron SP150-600mm F/5-6.3 VC USD


----------



## ruifo (Dec 14, 2013)

interestins news!


----------



## rhodeislandhntr (Dec 14, 2013)

maybe i can scoop up a nice 150-500 to get by with if some will be hitting the market soon, i just like carrying my camera with me at work and for walks in the woods, it gives me something to do.


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 14, 2013)

rhodeislandhntr said:


> maybe i can scoop up a nice 150-500 to get by with if some will be hitting the market soon, i just like carrying my camera with me at work and for walks in the woods, it gives me something to do.



Well you could always take a ride down to CT and try mine..  I plan on getting the Tamron when it is released so I will be selling the Sigma 150-500 that I got from winning the KEH photo contest...

Here's a small reminder of what it's predecessor, the Tamron 200-500 was capable of....


Hawk and Rabbit up close by krisinct, on Flickr



Loon Vs Striped bass 2 by krisinct, on Flickr



Sparrow by krisinct, on Flickr


----------



## Stevepwns (Dec 14, 2013)

If the image quality is there, I will have one.  Ive been reading up on this and there are a lot of people excited about this lens.


----------



## 18.percent.gary (Dec 15, 2013)

Coastalconn you'd be the best early adopter of the lens that I could hope for LOL. Can't wait to hear your take on the lens especially on a D300. Heck, I fly into New Haven on a regular basis and usually have 6 hours to kill before we leave. I'll bring my own D300 and rent a car and hop on 95 to come try it out myself (I'll wash my hands first)!


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 15, 2013)

18.percent.gary said:


> Coastalconn you'd be the best early adopter of the lens that I could hope for LOL. Can't wait to hear your take on the lens especially on a D300. Heck, I fly into New Haven on a regular basis and usually have 6 hours to kill before we leave. I'll bring my own D300 and rent a car and hop on 95 to come try it out myself (I'll wash my hands first)!



What the heck do you fly into New Haven for?  I'm only about 45 minutes "north" on 95..


----------



## CaptainNapalm (Dec 15, 2013)

lonewolfsx said:


> In my personal opinion, people complaining about lens size and weight are a joke. If I'm going somewhere where I need to image quality increase from my iPhone's camera to my DSLR, I don't care if I have to lug around a 10 pound lens or two as long as my images are of the utmost perfect quality. Granted, I'm young and in good shape so I don't have issues carrying stuff all day. Still, I wish manufacturers would keep the weight savings stuff to the consumer lenses and just let the pro lenses be god awful heavy if it means better image quality, and many of my "tog" friends agree with me in this area.
> 
> That was off-topic, but now on topic: this new lens does look very nice. I've always been a fan of Sigma's nicer lenses, they are great price/performance, especially used, and they offer some lenses that nobody else does. Tamron had some pretty awesome lenses before, such as the 28-105 f/2.8... I look forward to these third party manufacturers continuing to build high quality glass as it'll either force camera-brand lenses to come down in price or go up in quality... always good for us (consumers).
> 
> 150-600... wow and f/6.3 while not great is still very respectable at that kind of length. If the quality is even half decent this could be great, though I'm not sure quite what market they're shooting for.



I'm relatively young and in shape and I damn care if I'm lugging around a 20 pound DSLR bag for the day, even if getting utmost best image quality is important.  I hope you're kidding, most people's issues with full frame DSLR's and long range zooms is the weight.  I can't remember how many threads I read here and everywhere else where people are just itching on finding ways on reducing the weight of their gear, no matter what the circumstances.


----------



## rhodeislandhntr (Dec 15, 2013)

coastal, sent you a PM.


----------



## 18.percent.gary (Dec 15, 2013)

coastalconn said:


> 18.percent.gary said:
> 
> 
> > Coastalconn you'd be the best early adopter of the lens that I could hope for LOL. Can't wait to hear your take on the lens especially on a D300. Heck, I fly into New Haven on a regular basis and usually have 6 hours to kill before we leave. I'll bring my own D300 and rent a car and hop on 95 to come try it out myself (I'll wash my hands first)!
> ...



I just drive the plane. The company i fly for owns United States Surgical Corp in North Haven and we come down from Portsmouth NH at least a couple times a month.

LOL 95 "North" in CT always gave me a chuckle... kind of like "down east" Maine.


----------



## j-digg (Dec 17, 2013)

I'm very much interested in this thing. Hopefully we see a lot of "real world" photos from Japan, when it releases there in 2 days.


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 18, 2013)

18.percent.gary said:


> coastalconn said:
> 
> 
> > 18.percent.gary said:
> ...



Yup "North" on 95 actually means due East..  hammonassett SP is in Madison about halfway between.. sundays/mondays im generally available..

I'm pretty excited by this lens as well..  I told Tamron they should sponser me, but they just ignored my message, lol.


----------



## j-digg (Dec 19, 2013)

If anyone is interested in DLing the full sized TIF files you can check them out here:

Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 Di VC USD ( A011)

I've checked out a few, wide open and @ f/9 and /11 It looks good enough for me for sure.


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 19, 2013)

j-digg said:


> If anyone is interested in DLing the full sized TIF files you can check them out here:
> 
> Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 Di VC USD ( A011)
> 
> I've checked out a few, wide open and @ f/9 and /11 It looks good enough for me for sure.



Its been available in Japan for 24 hours, I'm surprised there are no reviews or images from photographers other than the samples... hmmm


----------



## robbins.photo (Dec 19, 2013)

coastalconn said:


> j-digg said:
> 
> 
> > If anyone is interested in DLing the full sized TIF files you can check them out here:
> ...



Ya.. what gives.  They've had a whole day already.  Slackers.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 19, 2013)

the *e-Band*...looks like they've developed their own version of Nikon's groundbreaking nano-coating!


----------



## ruifo (Dec 19, 2013)

Price:
USD $1,069.00
Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD Lens for Nikon


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 19, 2013)

j-digg said:


> If anyone is interested in DLing the full sized TIF files you can check them out here:
> 
> Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 Di VC USD ( A011)
> 
> I've checked out a few, wide open and @ f/9 and /11 It looks good enough for me for sure.



They must be gone... I just get a blank page.


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 19, 2013)

480sparky said:


> j-digg said:
> 
> 
> > If anyone is interested in DLing the full sized TIF files you can check them out here:
> ...



I just checked, they are still there...  but the files are huge!


----------



## j-digg (Dec 19, 2013)

I think this is the link I posted in another site, It's in Japanese but if you scroll down there are photos. They make me even more optimistic.


Edit: I suppose I might as well include the link, lol 

http://kakaku.com/item/K0000605175/picture/#tab

Oh there are a couple new ones on there today. Time to hop on my PC and check it out.

Bah, beware. Some ( about 5 ) are not from this lens.


----------



## coastalconn (Dec 24, 2013)

well it is slightly lost in translation, but here is a sort of review...  https://translate.google.hu/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=hu&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trinitylumberton.org%2Fcategory29%2F&act=url

It was good enough that I pre-ordered one last night.  I think this lens will perform very well on the D7100 with the F8 AF module on the center point.  It was interesting to see the focus speed on the 6D.  I hope it will be as good as my sigma 120-300 F2.8 with a TC.  It could be a very good daylight lens for my Ospreys..


----------



## Fox_Racing_Guy (Jan 28, 2014)

Did they push back the release of this lens for the U.S.A.? I thought it was suppose to be on the market by now but both B&H, Adorama are not showing any release date now..


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 28, 2014)

AFAIK, it's out now in a Canon mount.  Nikoners must wait until the end of March.

I guess they save the best for last.


----------



## ruifo (Jan 28, 2014)

Here the link for several reviews, already:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...s-new-tamron-150-600mm-f-5-6-3-poping-up.html

Have a look!!


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 16, 2014)

So this beast arrived yesterday.  Unfortunately, it was after work and I had no time to use it where I normally would.  

The weight difference between the Tamron and the Canon 300f4 did not seem significant.  However, mounted on the camera (60d gripped w/2 batteries) was damn near a shocker.  It is a beast.

There will not be any extended periods of handhelds shots.  I don't think I will need a gimbal head yet (my $150 SLIK tripods held it well - balanced).  I will be getting a better/sturdier monopod.  

IMO it focused fast on subjects that where somewhat near the same distance.  However, it struggled and sometimes failed to focus on subjects that were not particularly close in distance.  I had to use fulltime manual focus to get in the ballpark (my 300f4 rarely had this issue).  I hope that makes sense and I will test and give more precise distance information later today.

Sorry no pics yet and hopefully these quicky first impressions don't confuse anyone.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 16, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> So this beast arrived yesterday. Unfortunately, it was after work and I had no time to use it where I normally would.
> 
> The weight difference between the Tamron and the Canon 300f4 did not seem significant. However, mounted on the camera (60d gripped w/2 batteries) was damn near a shocker. It is a beast.
> 
> ...



Ok, so I'm confused here.  Is this a me likey?  Me no likey?  Lol


----------



## Derrel (Apr 16, 2014)

JacaRanda said:
			
		

> IMO it focused fast on subjects that where somewhat near the same distance.  However, *it struggled and sometimes failed to focus on subjects that were not particularly close in distance.  I had to use fulltime manual focus to get in the ballpark* (my 300f4 rarely had this issue).  I hope that makes sense and I will test and give more precise distance information later today.



The bolded part of your post makes total sense to me; the lens is "slow", aperture-wise...on MANY cameras, f/5.6 is the minimum aperture that is specified by camera makers as being able to provide autofocus; only the VERY-newest Nikon models have AF modules specified to work at f/8...so...a lens that is only an f/6.3 throughout a part of its zoom range might very well have some "issues" at achieving AF from what I call "a cold start"...but given "a running start", or "pre-focused", the lens will AF well.

Same thing is true with the Nikon 80-400 AF-D lens...it can sometimes not do a good job of initiating autofocus if the focused distance and the subject distance are widely separated...same thing with the 70-300 AF-S VR-G Nikon lens...if the focus distance is wayyyyy off from the subject, sometimes that lens will just do NOTHING, until the user grabs the focusing ring and initiates AF by manually turning the ring!

Of course, "after work" might mean the light level was low, or the light was "flat" and low-contrast; with slow lenses, and f/5~6.3 is slow, low-contrast, flat light, or flat, low-contrast subject matter can also affect AF performance, so your one-afternoon, first-experience report ought not be considered *definitive *in any way.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 16, 2014)

Derrel said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ok, but the real question here is buying one going to get me closer to my goal of having my TPF status upgraded to "self congratulatory mocker" - lol


----------



## Derrel (Apr 16, 2014)

robbins.photo said:
			
		

> Ok, but the real question here is buying one going to get me closer to my goal of having my TPF status upgraded to "*self congratulatory mocker*" - lol




"There's an epaulette for that."


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 16, 2014)

Derrel said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dude.. seriously!!!! OMG - finally!!!  A chance to break those old Michael Jackson coats out of the closet.  Oh that so ROCKS!!!  

Lol


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 16, 2014)

Mr. Rob Benz, I gave you a like on your comment.  Can you figure out if that means I likey???     I will really be able to tell once I point it at some colorful birds.

Mr. D-sizzle,  my quick little test was in plenty of nice bright sunlight.  Thank you for clearing the issue up though.  I would hate to send it back after just one day (45 minutes).

More to come hopefully in a few hours!


----------



## hamlet (Apr 16, 2014)

If i ever get an interest in photographing non-hamster animals that fly i'll think about this lens. Looks good.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 16, 2014)

hamlet said:


> If i ever get an interest in photographing non-hamster animals that fly i'll think about this lens. Looks good.



Hey, at least you have interest at all again....I hope


----------



## hamlet (Apr 16, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> hamlet said:
> 
> 
> > If i ever get an interest in photographing non-hamster animals that fly i'll think about this lens. Looks good.
> ...



I've found new interests. Right now i'm focusing on very old structures, i hope to get some nice lighting so i can shoot the picture i've got in my mind, just gotta wait for better weather.


----------



## HL45 (Apr 18, 2014)

I'm really interested in this lens. I looked at the flickr page and the images look fine to me. Just have to ask if anyone has used the lens with a canon 1.4x TC? 
My current setup MarkIII 100-400+1.4x = 560mm@f/8 w/center focus point. So I assume 840mm@f/9?? w/center focus point? with the new lens.


----------



## Braineack (Apr 18, 2014)

HL45 said:


> My current setup MarkIII 100-400+1.4x = 560mm@f/8 w/center focus point. So I assume 840mm@f/9?? w/center focus point? with the new lens.



or 600mm @ f/6.3 w/ all focus points!


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 18, 2014)

HL45 said:


> I'm really interested in this lens. I looked at the flickr page and the images look fine to me. Just have to ask if anyone has used the lens with a canon 1.4x TC?
> My current setup MarkIII 100-400+1.4x = 560mm@f/8 w/center focus point. So I assume 840mm@f/9?? w/center focus point? with the new lens.



I have yet to try it with the same 1.4x TC. TGIF. Hoping I don't have to battle with Wifey over the new toy.

However, we are using croppy cameras   60 & 70 Deez.


----------



## HL45 (Apr 18, 2014)

Braineack said:


> HL45 said:
> 
> 
> > My current setup MarkIII 100-400+1.4x = 560mm@f/8 w/center focus point. So I assume 840mm@f/9?? w/center focus point? with the new lens.
> ...


True! but 840mm sounds so cool


----------



## HL45 (Apr 18, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> HL45 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm really interested in this lens. I looked at the flickr page and the images look fine to me. Just have to ask if anyone has used the lens with a canon 1.4x TC?
> ...


Hope you try it soon, should be fun! Surely she will let you try it


----------



## DarkShadow (Apr 18, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> So this beast arrived yesterday. Unfortunately, it was after work and I had no time to use it where I normally would.
> 
> The weight difference between the Tamron and the Canon 300f4 did not seem significant. However, mounted on the camera (60d gripped w/2 batteries) was damn near a shocker. It is a beast.
> 
> ...



Pictures with the new toy but hey take your time but hurry up inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 18, 2014)

HL45 said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > HL45 said:
> ...



The 1.4x III does not fit    The lens has bits that won't allow the extender to be inserted


----------



## BillM (Apr 18, 2014)

I must have missed the post where you showed us the test pictures


----------



## Derrel (Apr 18, 2014)

Jaca, You don't need no stinking tele-extender!!!! (Remember that movie. with Bogart and the fake police? lol)  You can crop the 60 and 70 Deeeezzes images and get tighter framing!!!

It seems like the ONLY TC units that used to work on lenses off-list were those "Pro" series ones from ________. Drawing a blank on the brand name.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 18, 2014)

Darkshadow & BillM sorry, but it will have to wait until tomorrow.  No work so I can chase the sun all day  







Before


IMG_2694-5 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr

After big crop


IMG_2694-6 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr



IMG_2656-3 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr



IMG_2668-4 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr



IMG_2644-2 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr



IMG_2638-1 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 18, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Jaca, You don't need no stinking tele-extender!!!! (Remember that movie. with Bogart and the fake police? lol)  You can crop the 60 and 70 Deeeezzes images and get tighter framing!!!
> 
> It seems like the ONLY TC units that used to work on lenses off-list were those "Pro" series ones from ________. Drawing a blank on the brand name.



Indeed you are right.  I seriously don't need no stinking tc.  I get seasick dizzay just by the camera shake at 600mm.   The cheap beer hangover kinda feeling. 

Oops, X 1.6 so 960 seasickish


----------



## Derrel (Apr 18, 2014)

I LOVE the way goslings have that almost neon-yellow coloration for a week or two during the early stages!!! it does not last very long. So...you got the new 150-600...I think a LOT of people are really interested in hearing how that thing actually performs. It has sooooo much reach for just over a thousand dollars! I've seen some samples from it. I think it has a lovely defocused background look to its images.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 19, 2014)

You are right.  I first saw these little ones on Wednesday and today I could see the change; in size also.  

Wifey ordered the lens back in January.  Not fair that it arrived 40 years later on a Tuesday while I was at work.  
Tomorrow should be fun as I will have a full day with it.  

The price was the main factor in the decision to buy it.  Everything else anywhere near that range is a dream or bankruptcy court :er:


----------



## nzmacro (Apr 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> You are right.  I first saw these little ones on Wednesday and today I could see the change; in size also.
> 
> Wifey ordered the lens back in January.  Not fair that it arrived 40 years later on a Tuesday while I was at work.
> Tomorrow should be fun as I will have a full day with it.
> ...



Looking forward to seeing more shots. Nicely done. The biggest issue and especially for BIF's, is finding the darn things to start with at those focal lengths  Often use the 800mm with a 1.4x and its not easy on APS-c. A 500-600 seems easy after that.

Anyway, congrats and its looking really good  Well done.

Danny.


----------



## HL45 (Apr 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Jaca, You don't need no stinking tele-extender!!!! (Remember that movie. with Bogart and the fake police? lol)  You can crop the 60 and 70 Deeeezzes images and get tighter framing!!!
> 
> It seems like the ONLY TC units that used to work on lenses off-list were those "Pro" series ones from ________. Drawing a blank on the brand name.


Kenko? I did some searching last night, someone talked to Tamron and said no TC will work on the 150-600. Either way I'm still wanting to try this lens. It's a cheap rental, might try it for a week before giving up my 100-400. 
Jaca, thanks for trying!


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 19, 2014)

nzmacro said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > You are right.  I first saw these little ones on Wednesday and today I could see the change; in size also.
> ...



No doubt Danny - it was truly a challenge.  More times than not, I keep my left eye open (right eye on vf).  It did not help at all.  An osprey flew right over me maybe 20 ft off the ground and in perfect light this morning.  I did not even attempt to lift the camera.


----------



## nzmacro (Apr 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> nzmacro said:
> 
> 
> > JacaRanda said:
> ...



It is tough work for sure. Once you go from 500 to 600 - 800mm in visual focal length there is a huge difference. A lot want it, but when they get it, they wonder why  Having said that though, those focal lengths pull in so much and of course, you don't need to crop near as much and still end up with a sharp shot. Well worth while if you are stubborn with it. Once you start lifting it and nail a few shots, the technique with those focal length's all falls into place. It will happen for sure, guaranteed with what I've seen of your shots so far, here and on flickr. Excellent shooting !!. 20 meters might be pushing it though , very hard at a close distance like that. 

Are you using a monopod at all ??. Its a huge help to start with. I use the old NEX-7 and the EVF is on the left hand side and using the right eye is really easy and same as you, left eye is always open as well. 

All the best and looking forward to a few more shots with it, seems pretty darn sharp from what I've seen. Good on you 

Danny.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 19, 2014)

Thanks Danny!

I have a baby monopod, actually called a lighty pod.  It's too short and I am already looking at getting something I can be confident in and functions well - ball head, quick release plate etc.

Today I used a tripod and took most shots using it before getting restless.  For the most part, I like to incorporate lots of walking while out shooting.  

More shots to come shortly.


----------



## NancyMoranG (Apr 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> You tease!


----------



## DarkShadow (Apr 19, 2014)

Hey those crops look great, nice and sharp. Talking about birds in flight, I lose them all the time @ 500mm so I try to track them further away then lock focus in continues focus and then pan with them  until they move in closer or I get tired holding up the lens. it usually is the latter..LOL


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 19, 2014)

Here are several more from this morning.

1. 

IMG_3212-45 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr

2. 

IMG_3180-44 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr

3. 

IMG_3162-43 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr

4. 

IMG_3107-41 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr

5. 

IMG_3087-37 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr

6. 

IMG_3070-35 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr

7. 

IMG_2856-20 by JacaRandaPhotography, on Flickr

There are plenty more on the Flickr page.   Have to say it's a no brainer keeper and I can't wait to learn how to use it.  By the time that happens hopefully I will have a camera with a better focusing system.  Wifey keeps offering the 70d to play with,  but I am trying to be patient for that rumor model.


----------



## dxqcanada (Apr 19, 2014)

The images look pretty good at 600mm.
How have you found camera shake + hand held with that focal length ?


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 19, 2014)

dxqcanada said:


> The images look pretty good at 600mm.
> How have you found camera shake + hand held with that focal length ?



The camera shake is horrible.  I mean I am horrible.      The first 3 shots were handheld.  It can be done and I will get better as my whole freakin body gets stronger.   There are a few muscles being used I forgot existed. 

Today I used the tripod for over three hundred shots.  Pretty sure that is more than all other times combined.  A nice monopod will be a good marriage.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dxqcanada (Apr 19, 2014)

Hmm, sounds like the VC ain't holding up it part of the job ... question is, does VC have any affect at high shutter speed ?

Monopod sounds like a good idea ... I always have one attached to my slingbag just in case.

Pretty good wide open @ f/6.3

Comments on AF speed ?


----------



## BillM (Apr 19, 2014)

Those look real nice Jaca :thumbup:


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 19, 2014)

dxqcanada said:


> Hmm, sounds like the VC ain't holding up it part of the job ... question is, does VC have any affect at high shutter speed ?
> 
> Monopod sounds like a good idea ... I always have one attached to my slingbag just in case.
> 
> ...



I told wifey I did not feel this lens did anything better than her Canon 100-400.  It's just longer, heavier and not push pull zoom.

I have no complaints on AF speed when there is adequate light.  When there isn't, you will have to use fulltime manual.   Derrel noted this is expected or at least common with slow lenses.

VC in my opinion works fine too.  600mm is just going to magnify my movements (from 300 to 600 is a crazy jump for this old man.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## nzmacro (Apr 20, 2014)

Beauty !! Well done and those are looking excellent, very nice to see. The weight you get used to and its not like you have to lift for too long at any stage. Big smiles and great to see  Its lighter than the 500 F/4.5 so you should be fine hand held once you get used to it.

All the best and great shots.

Danny.


----------



## DarkShadow (Apr 20, 2014)

One thing about the powerful magnification zooms it really shows how steady you are. Turn off the IS and let the fun begin.:mrgreen: I turned off the IS a couple times with the sigma @ 500mm trying zero in on a tiny bird like a nuthatch or chickadee I was getting dizzy from all the motion.


----------



## nzmacro (Apr 22, 2014)

Gees, I've been looking at the shots on your flickr account using this lens, brilliant !!. For those that haven't looked, i would suggest you check his link out . Well worth while and that lens is in the right hands 

All the best Jaca, impressive work.

Danny.


----------



## Braineack (Apr 22, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> Here are several more from this morning.
> 
> There are plenty more on the Flickr page.   Have to say it's a no brainer keeper and I can't wait to learn how to use it.  By the time that happens hopefully I will have a camera with a better focusing system.  Wifey keeps offering the 70d to play with,  but I am trying to be patient for that rumor model.



now we're talking!  Honestly I wasn't very impressed by the first trinkling of shots coming out with it, but these do it much justice.


----------



## DarkShadow (Apr 22, 2014)

Looked over some of the shots on flicker as suggested by Danny (AKA) nzmarco really great stuff Jaca. Gave some likes while I visited.


----------



## HL45 (Apr 22, 2014)

Just reserved (rented) this lens for a week next month. I'm impressed with the photos here and on Flickr. I have a feeling I won't like returning it after a week.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 23, 2014)

DarkShadow said:


> One thing about the powerful magnification zooms it really shows how steady you are. Turn off the IS and let the fun begin.:mrgreen: I turned off the IS a couple times with the sigma @ 500mm trying zero in on a tiny bird like a nuthatch or chickadee I was getting dizzy from all the motion.



Haaaa, reminds me of this 



.


----------

