Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 07 Nov 2013 (Thursday) 09:38
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tamron developing 150-600mm VC USD lens

 
archer1960
Goldmember
Avatar
4,930 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 81
Joined Jul 2010
     
Dec 16, 2013 09:21 |  #691

commonjunks wrote in post #16531180 (external link)
Those who are hoping you will get something for 1k and beat 200-400, 500 or 600 primes, please don't bother waiting :p.

I don't think anybody thinks that is even possible, let alone realistic. But we can always hope, I guess, just as I can always hope to win the lottery tomorrow...


Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jbrackjr
Senior Member
481 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Georgia, USA
     
Dec 16, 2013 09:23 |  #692

I have a 100-400 and TC. However, IMO the combination sucks. Yes, you can occasionally get a decent pic but for the most part it IQ is lousy.

So for me, if the Tamron is only as good as a 100-400 + TC, they can keep it.


Jim
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
archer1960
Goldmember
Avatar
4,930 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 81
Joined Jul 2010
     
Dec 16, 2013 09:23 |  #693

Roy C wrote in post #16531227 (external link)
Although I have seen that it has VC I cannot see anything which says 4 stops (or any other number of stops) - where did you see that?

Well, IIRC their 18-270 claims 4 stops, though realistically it's more like 2 - 3 in my experience.


Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
archer1960
Goldmember
Avatar
4,930 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 81
Joined Jul 2010
     
Dec 16, 2013 09:25 |  #694

jbrackjr wrote in post #16531309 (external link)
I have a 100-400 and TC. However, IMO the combination sucks. Yes, you can occasionally get a decent pic but for the most part it IQ is lousy.

So for me, if the Tamron is only as good as a 100-400 + TC, they can keep it.

Maybe for you , but for those who can't (or don't want to) afford a 100-400+TC or 400/5.6+TC, this would have a lot of appeal.


Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hrblaine
Senior Member
284 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2005
     
Dec 16, 2013 09:27 |  #695

I dunno, my 70-300 with a 1.4 extender gives me enuf reach + the portability that led me to 35mm in the first place. I just can't see lugging around a lens the size of the hood on my car AND a tripod. Of course, ymmv!! Harry PS And a 35mm is usually wide enuf for me too altho I do have a 24-105. <g>




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,309 posts
Gallery: 953 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24426
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Dec 16, 2013 09:29 |  #696

pwm2 wrote in post #16531255 (external link)
No one (I hope) is expecting that.

But the original hope was that it would beat the 400+TC and 100-400+TC, and match the 100-400 within the common range of 150-400mm.

This is also what I am hoping for.


Peter
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/peterbangay​an (external link)
EOS 5D Mark IV, 1Dx1, 7D Mark I & II/Canon T2i Gripped/EF 500mm f/4L IS USM MK1 / EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM / EF100 -400 f4.5-5.6L USM/ EFS 10-22mm/EFS 17-55mm/EFS 18-200mm/Canon 1.4x II/Canon 2x III/ 430EXII / 580EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
THREAD ­ STARTER
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,158 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2467
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 16, 2013 09:42 |  #697

archer1960 wrote in post #16531112 (external link)
I actually find this price a little disappointing. I was hoping for something of the quality of the Sigma 50-500, but at this price point, it's much more likely to be around the quality of the 150-500.

the thing is, there really isn't that huge of a difference between the two sigma lenses either....at least in the center, where i think the majority care about


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
archer1960
Goldmember
Avatar
4,930 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 81
Joined Jul 2010
     
Dec 16, 2013 09:47 |  #698

pwm2 wrote in post #16531255 (external link)
No one (I hope) is expecting that.

But the original hope was that it would beat the 400+TC and 100-400+TC, and match the 100-400 within the common range of 150-400mm.

To me, the only thing that matters is how it performs at 300mm and over; there are many other options for 300mm and down. If they would have made it a (say) 250-600, sacrificing the bottom 100mm for some increased IQ, I would be happy. It may well be plenty good even with that extra reach, though. We'll just have to wait and see...


Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,302 posts
Likes: 2331
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Dec 16, 2013 10:04 |  #699

jbrackjr wrote in post #16531309 (external link)
I have a 100-400 and TC. However, IMO the combination sucks. Yes, you can occasionally get a decent pic but for the most part it IQ is lousy.

So for me, if the Tamron is only as good as a 100-400 + TC, they can keep it.

Hmm.. bad t-con? I have always had pretty decent results from mine.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jbrackjr
Senior Member
481 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Georgia, USA
     
Dec 16, 2013 10:35 |  #700

gjl711 wrote in post #16531403 (external link)
Hmm.. bad t-con? I have always had pretty decent results from mine.

My TC works great with the 200 2.8. And with perfect light, stopped down, manual focusing and shooting a statue it works ok with the 100-400. IQ is not that great. Some shots turn out ok, but most not so much.


Jim
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Dec 16, 2013 10:44 |  #701

DreDaze wrote in post #16531342 (external link)
the thing is, there really isn't that huge of a difference between the two sigma lenses either....at least in the center, where i think the majority care about

Well remember that a bird at 600 fills more of the frame than a bird at 400. Almost all lenses can do good in the center - we really want a significant part of the image to be sharp. And at 600, there is very little curvature to compensate for so there are some chances that it can do well.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Dec 16, 2013 10:46 |  #702

jbrackjr wrote in post #16531472 (external link)
My TC works great with the 200 2.8. And with perfect light, stopped down, manual focusing and shooting a statue it works ok with the 100-400. IQ is not that great. Some shots turn out ok, but most not so much.

Note that not all TC does well matched with different lenses.

So a TC that works great with a 200/2.8 can be worse with the 100-400 than a TC that doesn't work so well with the 200/2.8.

There are no adjustment settings available to us, to match a TC to a specific lens.


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clarnibass
Senior Member
793 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2011
     
Dec 16, 2013 10:51 |  #703

The 500mm+ primes cost far more that a comparison with them is pretty much irrelevant.

The lens is 600mm so a comparison with 400mm+1.4TC can be relevant, but they are $800-$1,100 more expensive, start at f/8 and some of those options don't have any zoom. So for many people that is already a different market and actually irrelevant too.

Re whoever mentioned this is "just" $120 more than the 200-500mm. I'm pretty sure Tamron advertises this is a replacement for that lens, so I guess they couldn't or didn't "want" to make it astronomically more expensive (OTOH there's Nikon...).
The USD, VC, 7 more elements, coatings, etc. may have been far more expensive to make in the past, but just like a current $500 computer is far better than a $4,000 computer 20 years ago (purposely giving an extreme example), it's possible (even likely) that all those things cost them far less now. Maybe they have nearly only production cost for them. At least with the USD and VC they have them (and they are excellent) on the $450 70-300mm lens.

Re the post about Tamron not finding a "magical" way to make an excellent lens so "cheap"... just because there are better lenses doesn't mean a lens is not good, or even excellent. Just because the 70-300mm isn't as good as a 300mm prime or the 70-300mm L doesn't mean it's not good. It is very good IMO and possibly the best value in that range.
I don't think anyone knows where the 150-600mm is made yet. It will probably be written on the lens. My 70-300mm is made in China. The better Canon lenses are made in Japan. This alone can make a huge difference in price, seperate from quality.
Plus, no one knows how Tamron really works in terms of what they do and what they have to charge. A random example, it's possible that two people come up with a similar, worse, or better lens design than four people, but four people cost double. This is just a random example but no one really knows what the situation is for any of those companies for them to sell any lens for the price they choose.

So, I expect, or at least hope, that this new Tamron is at least as good as their 70-300mm, which is sharp and not too far from the Canon L lens. For anyone who was hoping it would be $500 more for better quality, who knows if making it $500 more expensive could really make it better quality optically. It might take far more than that to make it better in a significant way. IMO it only matters how the lens really is, how much it actually costs and how it compares with lenses that are worth comparing it with. When it is available here I will definitely go and try it.


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jbrackjr
Senior Member
481 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Georgia, USA
     
Dec 16, 2013 11:09 |  #704

pwm2 wrote in post #16531497 (external link)
Note that not all TC does well matched with different lenses.

So a TC that works great with a 200/2.8 can be worse with the 100-400 than a TC that doesn't work so well with the 200/2.8.

There are no adjustment settings available to us, to match a TC to a specific lens.


Yes, I agree with you. But going back to my original statement (post 692), if the Tamron works only as good as a 100-400 + TC, they can keep it. YMMV


Jim
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bsmooth
Senior Member
Avatar
861 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Feb 2005
Location: New England
     
Dec 16, 2013 11:23 as a reply to  @ jbrackjr's post |  #705

My bet would be made in China. If your shooting this much of a lens its probably for Wildlife or birds anyways.
For most people this will be the lens they will use, because they cannot afford anything else that has this magnification.
The real question is will they be able to maintain quality down the road, even Canon and Nikon have had issues in the past with good and bad copies of lenses.
I sure hope it pans out for this lens, I know I have my eye on it thats for sure.


Bruce

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

635,751 views & 5 likes for this thread
Tamron developing 150-600mm VC USD lens
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is dm19dm
1659 guests, 268 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.