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 Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
Thread started 13 Dec 2013 (Friday) 23:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tamron SP 150-600mm Di VC USD

 
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 17, 2014 15:39 as a reply to  @ post 16610726 |  #1846

This shot was very unplanned/no time to prepare to take the shot really. I was capturing a Hawk in a tree, then decided to try and get some shots of this plane as it went overhead. I didn't expect them to even turn out, but they ended up being pretty decent. Normally I shoot at F/8 now to get the best overall sharpness. F/7.1 is still not bad.

However, I just did a test at 400,500 and 600. Even at 400 F/5.6, it's very very sharp. It noticeably softens from there to 600. But F/8 at 600 gives sharp results. F/9 might be a tad better, but then you lose more light. I'm going to test now and see if I can crop the 400 shot at 5.6, to match the 600, and see if it still appears sharper.


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1061
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Feb 17, 2014 16:12 |  #1847

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #16696820 (external link)
However, I just did a test at 400,500 and 600. Even at 400 F/5.6, it's very very sharp. It noticeably softens from there to 600. But F/8 at 600 gives sharp results. F/9 might be a tad better, but then you lose more light. I'm going to test now and see if I can crop the 400 shot at 5.6, to match the 600, and see if it still appears sharper.

That's exactly what I found when I had the Tamron (for a week).
If you get closer and can zoom back to 400mm, shooting wide open is good and sharp.
Even 500mm wide open (f/6.3) is pretty good. But if you need every mm of reach (600mm), it's better to stop down to 7.1 or 8.


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
palmor
Senior Member
Avatar
959 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Likes: 49
Joined Feb 2009
Location: North of Boston, MA
     
Feb 17, 2014 16:40 as a reply to  @ post 16696331 |  #1848

A couple for this weekend. Even with 600mm sometimes I think I just need a Hubble to get the shots I'd want ;)

Bald Eagle
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/640s f/8.0 at 600.0mm iso4000

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/palmor/image/154526728/original.jpg

Merganser
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/800s f/7.1 at 600.0mm iso1000
IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/palmor/image/154526726/original.jpg

Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/3200s f/8.0 at 600.0mm iso640
IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/palmor/image/154526725/original.jpg

John
http://pbase.com/palmo​r (external link)
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/johnw_trishw[/​URL (external link)
http://johnwoolleyphot​ography.com (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 17, 2014 16:41 |  #1849

gabebalazs wrote in post #16696902 (external link)
That's exactly what I found when I had the Tamron (for a week).
If you get closer and can zoom back to 400mm, shooting wide open is good and sharp.
Even 500mm wide open (f/6.3) is pretty good. But if you need every mm of reach (600mm), it's better to stop down to 7.1 or 8.

Yep. Pretty much right on. However, if you nail focus/have a high enough shutter speed, and/or stable tripod/setup, the 600 can match or beat the 400, at F/8. But it's much more difficult to do. This is what I just found in some tests I just did.

So it might be worth saying, if you can get away with it, 400mm should also give you a higher keeper rate/better results, depending on what I said above.


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 17, 2014 16:42 |  #1850

palmor wrote in post #16696985 (external link)
A couple for this weekend. Even with 600mm sometimes I think I just need a Hubble to get the shots I'd want ;)

Bald Eagle
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/640s f/8.0 at 600.0mm iso4000
QUOTED IMAGE

Merganser
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/800s f/7.1 at 600.0mm iso1000
QUOTED IMAGE

Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/3200s f/8.0 at 600.0mm iso640
QUOTED IMAGE

Nice shots!


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
palmor
Senior Member
Avatar
959 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Likes: 49
Joined Feb 2009
Location: North of Boston, MA
     
Feb 17, 2014 16:46 as a reply to  @ post 16695686 |  #1851

A couple for this weekend. Even with 600mm sometimes I think I just need a Hubble to get the shots I'd want ;)

Bald Eagle
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/640s f/8.0 at 600.0mm iso4000

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/palmor/image/154526728/original.jpg

Merganser
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/800s f/7.1 at 600.0mm iso1000
IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/palmor/image/154526726/original.jpg

Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/3200s f/8.0 at 600.0mm iso640
IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/palmor/image/154526725/original.jpg

John
http://pbase.com/palmo​r (external link)
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/johnw_trishw[/​URL (external link)
http://johnwoolleyphot​ography.com (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike55
Goldmember
Avatar
4,206 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
Feb 17, 2014 17:11 as a reply to  @ post 16610726 |  #1852

Good shots.

But, I used to have a 70-300 IS that was soft at 300. It was a pain to deal with, IMHO. I don't understand why a lens company just wouldn't make a 200-600 or a 300-600 that is sharpest at the long end.

Canon had the right idea with the 200-400, but as you know it's a bit pricey.


6D | 70D | 24-105 L IS | 17-40 L | 300 F4 L IS | 50 1.8 II | 1.4x II | LR5 | HV30 | bug spray | wilderness
Gallatin National Forest, Montana (external link)/Lassen Volcanic NP Campgrounds (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 17, 2014 17:15 as a reply to  @ post 16610726 |  #1853

Yeah, it's unfortunate... If you want the best results, you have to pay a drastic increase in price. Buy a new car, or buy a lens....hmmm, haha.


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,311 posts
Gallery: 955 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24481
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 17:34 |  #1854

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #16696991 (external link)
Nice shots!

+1. Palmor.


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
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,311 posts
Gallery: 955 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24481
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 17:38 as a reply to  @ post 16610726 |  #1855

From yesterday outing from our local park.

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7366/12591299155_5ee324b77b_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​591299155/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00096 (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2885/12591731494_25e2d4c83e_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​591731494/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00158-Edit (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3787/12591329575_1bc152d19a_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​591329575/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00166 (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

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
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,357 posts
Gallery: 209 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4234
Joined Dec 2008
     
Feb 17, 2014 17:39 |  #1856

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #16697081 (external link)
Yeah, it's unfortunate... If you want the best results, you have to pay a drastic increase in price. Buy a new car, or buy a lens....hmmm, haha.

If you want the best of just about anything, you have to pay more for it. Why should lenses be any different? ;)


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
guruofall
Member
100 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Pune, MH, India
     
Feb 17, 2014 17:49 |  #1857

palmor wrote in post #16696985 (external link)
A couple for this weekend. Even with 600mm sometimes I think I just need a Hubble to get the shots I'd want ;)

Canon EOS 5D Mark III
1/3200s f/8.0 at 600.0mm iso640
QUOTED IMAGE

This is impressive. I like it a lot.


Gear: Canon EOS 6D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 | 24-105mm f/4 IS L | 50mm f/1.8 | 100mm f/2.8 Macro | Tamron SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 Di VC USD | 580 ex ii
Old Gear: Canon 350D
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 17, 2014 17:53 |  #1858

Nice! Are these from the park down the road, near downtown Kirkland? With the moss covered archway?


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Levina ­ de ­ Ruijter
I'm a bloody goody two-shoes!
Avatar
18,437 posts
Gallery: 319 photos
Best ofs: 10
Likes: 7626
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, EU
     
Feb 17, 2014 17:58 as a reply to  @ guruofall's post |  #1859

gabebalazs wrote in post #16696503 (external link)
So again, most of the time I shoot I'm already dancing on the edge of the slowest acceptable shutter speed, while using my desired aperture (that could be already at wide open). I can't go slower, so if I wanted to ETTR, the only option would be to bump the ISO and pull back in post, which would result in no improvement, except my DR would be less a tiny bit due to shooting at a higher ISO.

Yes, this is a situation I often find myself in too. I don't like to take the 1D II N above ISO 800 but if I am at the lowest possible shutter speed but the shot at ISO 800 will be slightly underexposed I will go to ISO 1600 and end up with a cleaner shot then if I take the shot at ISO 800 and have to add light in post. But I definitely am a fan of ETTR and shoot everything slightly to the right if I can.


Levina (not Lavina, Lavinia, Levinia, Ludwina and what not, mkay?)
My flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,311 posts
Gallery: 955 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24481
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 18:36 |  #1860

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #16697201 (external link)
Nice! Are these from the park down the road, near downtown Kirkland? With the moss covered archway?

Thanks Matt. No this is the same spot where you are yesterday. I moved over there when I saw the Eagle perched on the tree near the viewing deck.


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

2,410,377 views & 5,997 likes for this thread
Tamron SP 150-600mm Di VC USD
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
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 Alymbek Usenov
1481 guests, 332 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.