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 31 Jan 2016 (Sunday) 02:45
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tamron 150-600 vs Sigma C

 
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,339 posts
Gallery: 527 photos
Likes: 2510
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Post edited over 3 years ago by KenjiS.
     
Jan 31, 2016 02:45 |  #1

As title says...

Lens would be on my 7D, Maybe a 7D Mark II in the near future (or possible 6DII if that drops) Whats the advantages/disadvantag​es to either. Have not liked Tamron lenses in the past but that was a LONG time ago.

Previously owned mk 1 100-400, 150-500 OS (2 copies) and the 50-500 OS, 100-400 and 50-500 OS were good, 150-500 was.. Less so, the new 150-600s look like good upgrades however. Currently using 70-200 f/4L IS + 1.4x Kenko TC and just find the AF with converter is prone to losing the subject and the reach just isnt long enough for birds. May also use it for planes.

Also considering say, a 300 f/4L IS with the TC or the 400 f/5.6L, but i think the zooms have the edge in versatility and there will be little gain in optics, but i might be wrong


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
5,866 posts
Gallery: 118 photos
Likes: 3923
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 31, 2016 05:22 |  #2

I think optically those two lenses are close enough to call it a draw. The Sigma has the advantage of the dock. To me that makes it the much better buy if price is close.


Dave
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,228 posts
Gallery: 1648 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10400
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jan 31, 2016 05:43 |  #3

Heya,

Despite all the mumbo jumbo, they're essentially equals in terms of image quality. Where they differ is in stabilization, and the Sigma has the fuller richer stabilization feature set. Otherwise, you'll hear one person state their copy is sharper than another, etc, and it goes back and forth. They're both plenty sharp for what they are and are again for all real world purposes, equals for image quality. The Sigma coming down to $1k for the C version is a big deal because it directly competes with the Tamron at $1k. That said, you can get both on deals. The Sigma can be had for less than $1k on deal, and the Tamron generally can be had 2nd hand for even less (I've been seeing a lot of $750's). For a lot of us, there was no option, and Tamron was it for a solid year, if you wanted an affordable physical 600mm. If I were buying today, and the prices were equal, I'd get the Sigma. That said, I have the Tamron, because again, I didn't have that choice when it was the only 600mm on the market for a year. And really, I'm still very pleased with the Tamron and I use it for birding and wildlife, astro, etc, on APS-C and my copy seems to be plenty sharp for me even wide open and I never did the firmware update and my stabilization works fine (I can pan with VC on and it works, so I never sent mine in).

That said, I bird weekly here in Florida, even in the cold. I more and more often use a shorter, faster telephoto on my 7D than my 600mm. I take my 600mm, but it often doesn't get nearly as much use as my shorter primes do. I actually prefer a 300mm F4 (if I could get F2.8, I'd use that instead!). But, it depends on what you're doing. I bird in swamp wetlands and the ocean shore here in Florida, and I often get close to birds. So close that 600mm is too long. I use my 600mm primarily for birds that do not allow you to get close (raptors in general). But more and more, I'm using a 300mm instead of my 600mm. And I do that for the speed of aperture, and the wicked fast autofocus that can keep up with a bird at 20 feet flying by, where my 600mm simply can't do that.

If I were to sell my Tamron today, I would just stick with my 300mm (I actually use a 200mm F2.8L and a 1.4x TC to make my "300 F4") on my APS-C and just save my money. My end game goal wildlife lens is the 300 F2.8L. I'll get an old non-IS one, one day. For now, have to get the kid through the dentist and get through tax season. That and I want a new boat. Priorities.... sigh.

Zooms are awesome for versatility, and 600mm for $1k is awesome. But, I still favor a good prime, it simply focuses faster, is sharper wide open, and I will take a shorter faster prime over a zoom in most situations and just let high resolution take care of the cropping. Again, after having owned a 600mm Tamron since it was released, I actually more and more use a 300 F4 more than anything.

I started with a 250mm.
I then got a 600mm when it was released. Used it nearly exclusively for a year.
Then started using a 400 F5.6, because I wanted the speed of AF and size.
Then I started using 300 F4 because I wanted speed of aperture.

What changed? My habits. I started out walking around and trying to shoot birds standing in the open like an obvious threat.
Then I started geting more into it and started going where my subjects were, early, and hanging out, or creeping up in a kayak, etc. I got closer to them.
So then I realized I didn't need 600mm. I started kayaking with a 400mm and walking around and using blinds with a 400mm. I still got closer.
Now I'm using 300 F4 because I can get that close and I love the F4 aperture look on telephoto. I can get closer still, but 10~15 feet is probably enough!

At this point, I'm just going to wait and get a 300 F2.8 as my final lens. I thought I wanted the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 OS, but I also want to keep it as compact as I can, and while that lens is awesome, I know I don't need anything shorter than 300mm and I would basically get it for the 300 F2.8 end and it would be useful with TC's. But, it's a big lens, bigger than the prime. So I think for me, the 300 F2.8L is the prime for me in the future. I salivate at a 500 F4L or 400 F2.8L, but ultimately, they're big, heavy, long and having shot 600mm, I've learned I don't need that long of a lens here in Florida, and I'd rather have the hand-holding-friendly 300 F2.8L, and I can always put a TC on there for a 600mm F5.6 on a gimbal if I want.

But again it greatly depends on what your situation is. For planes, I think the Sigma 600 is the way to go, you want the best stabilization you can get, so either the 600 Sigma C or a Canon 100-400 II at double the price. For birding, that depends on the species and how you do it. If you just walk around and shoot things if you happen upon them, get the 600mm. If you study subjects, creep, camp, use blinds, etc, you can get a shorter faster lens.

Here's the kind of proximity and BIF action I can get (this was yesterday) with a 200mm on my 7D using a 1.4x TC. I keep focus just fine (I set sensitivity of servo higher instead of lower when doing this kind of proximity). So this is a 7D with a 280mm F4 lens on there (200 f2.8L + 1.4x TC), and even some song birds:

IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1624/24715080115_b5e1f8dce0_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/DDZf​fX  (external link) IMG_0461 (external link) by Martin Wise (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1471/24347435029_d1b542c212_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/D6uY​bz  (external link) IMG_0391 (external link) by Martin Wise (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1493/24688855346_8be42cecc3_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/DBEQ​xL  (external link) IMG_0472 (external link) by Martin Wise (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1578/24419546970_91090d4109_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/DcSy​xU  (external link) IMG_0448 (external link) by Martin Wise (external link), on Flickr

Of course, I still love 600mm for doing things like this:

IMAGE: https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1504/24427698286_73ee64252c_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/DdAk​DQ  (external link) IMG_0353 (external link) by Martin Wise (external link), on Flickr

Choices are tough!

Very best,

My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ct1co2
Goldmember
Avatar
2,453 posts
Gallery: 61 photos
Likes: 1860
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Post edited over 3 years ago by ct1co2.
     
Jan 31, 2016 09:35 |  #4

I have the Sigma C and it's no secret here that I love it. I have a friend that is shooting with the Tamron. After I got the Sigma, he was contemplating selling his Tamron for the Sigma, but I recommended against it as he'd lose money to end up with something that essentially feels different, but no upside in IQ. Comparison of IQ between the 2 came down to the person holding it vs the lens itself. Shooting side by side, sometimes I got the better shot, other times him. I tried his Tamron before the Sigma came out and waited though. I do like the handling of the Sigma better as I prefer that the zoom turns in the "Canon" direction on the Sigma, but opposite on the Tamron. The dock and custom settings is nice to have and the lock at various focal lengths is a plus for me.


7D2 | 6D2 | 10-22 | 15-85is | Σ18-35 | Rokinon 14 2.8 | 16-35isL | 24-70isL | 85 1.8 | 100-400 II L | Σ150-600 C | 430ex |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,995 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1612
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Jan 31, 2016 12:28 |  #5

I tried the Tamron, and was really badly affected by the VC issues. The VC works fine at higher shutter speeds, over 1/1000 for me, but I think you can probably get away above 1/500. If you are shooting at those speeds, as you very often are, or at least want to be freezing motion there is little wrong with the Tamron. As an aviation photographer though I want to introduce some subject blur in the propellers. For that I generally use 1/160 as my FASTEST shutter speed. For large helicopters, like the Seaking it can get down as low as 1/60. When trying the Tamron even at focal lengths of under 300mm, which correspond to my cheap unstabilized Sigma 28-300, I got a keeper rate of about 5% of my normal rate. After a telephone conversation with a rep from the UK Tamron importer (Intro2020) he left me with the impression that making the VC work in mode 2 would not be practical without a hardware upgrade. I was in a way glad that most of the really important stuff that I had wanted to shoot had been cancelled due to weather and technical issues. At least the pictures that had been affected by the VC issue were not irreplaceable.

Having had such a bad experience with the rented Tamron I ended up getting the Sigma. The results so far, as I only managed to get it in time for the last show in the UK 2015 calendar, are certainly as good as any of the 100-400 MK I's that I have rented. I would say the Sigma is as good at 600mm as the Canon's are at 400mm. The OS system works really well, the show I shot was with the Sigma at the default factory settings, as I did not yet have a dock. I am waiting for the weather to improve a bit to try out the OS option settings to see how they work, as well as running the full 16 point MFA on the lens.

Here are some samples from the last UK air show of 2015.

This one was shot at 600mm and 1/160s, first the full shot resized to fit forum posting rules.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from BigAl007's gallery.


100% crop

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from BigAl007's gallery.


I printed the image as a 30×20, and had to resize the image to 9000×6000 px for the lab service I was using. These are a couple of 100% crops of that enlarged image.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from BigAl007's gallery.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from BigAl007's gallery.


To get some interesting angles even 600mm wasn't really long enough, the following images have had an additional 1.5× crop, giving an equivalent 900mm field of view.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from BigAl007's gallery.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from BigAl007's gallery.


Alan

My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,339 posts
Gallery: 527 photos
Likes: 2510
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 31, 2016 14:21 |  #6

Thanks for the advice, seems my gut was right and the Sigma seems the better idea at basically the same price cause of that stabilizer, Also good to hear its optically on par with my 100-400 (Which was the best of the type of lens that I owned. Even if i did feel my 100-400 wasnt a great copy)

I just know from my experience that even the 400 was a bit "short' feeling, Sadly i dont usually have much cover, i always do my best to stalk and get close to subjects but there is a hard limit, All said, the 70-200 and TC have been a good stopgap. Oddly the favorite lens I had was the 50-500, The only reason i did not keep it is that it optically wasnt as good as the 100-400 (Which made me feel weird keeping it) but i found its dark paint job made it easier to physically get closer, which somewhat

There doesnt seem to be much in the S version optically from what I've seen, At least not enough to warrant the increase in price and weight.


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,452 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 1496
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Jan 31, 2016 14:46 |  #7

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #17879007 (external link)
hahahah....very cute :)

KenjiS wrote in post #17880553 (external link)
Thanks for the advice, seems my gut was right and the Sigma seems the better idea at basically the same price cause of that stabilizer, Also good to hear its optically on par with my 100-400 (Which was the best of the type of lens that I owned. Even if i did feel my 100-400 wasnt a great copy)

I just know from my experience that even the 400 was a bit "short' feeling, Sadly i dont usually have much cover, i always do my best to stalk and get close to subjects but there is a hard limit, All said, the 70-200 and TC have been a good stopgap. Oddly the favorite lens I had was the 50-500, The only reason i did not keep it is that it optically wasnt as good as the 100-400 (Which made me feel weird keeping it) but i found its dark paint job made it easier to physically get closer, which somewhat

There doesnt seem to be much in the S version optically from what I've seen, At least not enough to warrant the increase in price and weight.


The other option, since you have a 5D3 would be the new 100-400 + 1.4 TC; that's actually the route I'm leaning after having gone down the Tamron 150-600 route. Even aside from the VC issues with panning, I just do not get results I am happy with when compared to my 100-400.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,356 posts
Gallery: 207 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4216
Joined Dec 2008
Post edited over 3 years ago by LV Moose.
     
Jan 31, 2016 15:06 |  #8

Snydremark wrote in post #17880597 (external link)
The other option, since you have a 5D3 would be the new 100-400 + 1.4 TC; that's actually the route I'm leaning after having gone down the Tamron 150-600 route. Even aside from the VC issues with panning, I just do not get results I am happy with when compared to my 100-400.

If I had to do it over, I would go this way as well. When the Tamron first came out, I enamored with the idea of 600mm for $1K. It's sharp enough up to around 520mm (that's my experience), but for panning BIF's or prop aircraft I find it fairly sucky. I suspect the offerings from Sigma are better, but I should have saved my ducats for a 100-400II and the 1.4X III.


Moose

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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,339 posts
Gallery: 527 photos
Likes: 2510
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 31, 2016 15:52 |  #9

Snydremark wrote in post #17880597 (external link)
The other option, since you have a 5D3 would be the new 100-400 + 1.4 TC; that's actually the route I'm leaning after having gone down the Tamron 150-600 route. Even aside from the VC issues with panning, I just do not get results I am happy with when compared to my 100-400.

No 5D3 lol, 7D and probubly getting a 7D2 sometime this year is what i decided on after lengthy debate with myself. I might go full frame, but it would be more likely the 6D successor, unless theres some really good 5D3 deals

Eh I considered just going whole hog on the 100-400 II but I really was never a fan of the white finish, I DID find the white finish 100-400 made it more difficult to approach subjects when i had the two Sigmas, Also attracted more unwanted attention... Plus twice the price, Worth every penny sure but the way I look at it is it would take longer to acquire the 100-400 II, in the time it takes i can have the Sigma and shoot with it and get a lot of lovely images to show off, Down the line maybe upgrade. But I have no complaints if we're talking optics on par with my old 100-400, I did some great stuff with that lens after all, Was a workhorse for me.

Probubly going to wait just a bit to order however, No birds out at the moment, a few squirrels, but thats about it, I'm just planning my acquisitions for the year in advance, 2016 feels the year for me to upgrade (My 7D has been around since release after all) Heck I even contemplated moving to Nikon, but at the end of the day i already have most lenses I want, to start over and rebuy EVERYTHING is silly and theres nothing Nikon has that I cant get on Canon. Plus Im one of the crazies who loves the 7D if the internet is to be believed ;)


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,452 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 1496
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Jan 31, 2016 16:12 |  #10

KenjiS wrote in post #17880673 (external link)
No 5D3 lol, 7D and probubly getting a 7D2 sometime this year is what i decided on after lengthy debate with myself. I might go full frame, but it would be more likely the 6D successor, unless theres some really good 5D3 deals

Eh I considered just going whole hog on the 100-400 II but I really was never a fan of the white finish, I DID find the white finish 100-400 made it more difficult to approach subjects when i had the two Sigmas, Also attracted more unwanted attention... Plus twice the price, Worth every penny sure but the way I look at it is it would take longer to acquire the 100-400 II, in the time it takes i can have the Sigma and shoot with it and get a lot of lovely images to show off, Down the line maybe upgrade. But I have no complaints if we're talking optics on par with my old 100-400, I did some great stuff with that lens after all, Was a workhorse for me.

Probubly going to wait just a bit to order however, No birds out at the moment, a few squirrels, but thats about it, I'm just planning my acquisitions for the year in advance, 2016 feels the year for me to upgrade (My 7D has been around since release after all) Heck I even contemplated moving to Nikon, but at the end of the day i already have most lenses I want, to start over and rebuy EVERYTHING is silly and theres nothing Nikon has that I cant get on Canon. Plus Im one of the crazies who loves the 7D if the internet is to be believed ;)

I read your sig incorrectly, now I see that's a want list item. Of the other two options, I would for the Sigma over the Tamron, for a lot of earlier points. In particular, the Sigma hand feel/operation just feels better and more robust. I've even seen a few deals where they're throwing the Dock in free as a bonus.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,339 posts
Gallery: 527 photos
Likes: 2510
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Jan 31, 2016 19:16 |  #11

Snydremark wrote in post #17880695 (external link)
I read your sig incorrectly, now I see that's a want list item. Of the other two options, I would for the Sigma over the Tamron, for a lot of earlier points. In particular, the Sigma hand feel/operation just feels better and more robust. I've even seen a few deals where they're throwing the Dock in free as a bonus.

Yikes i totally forgot my Sig is so out of date, its from before the 150-600 or 7D II became a thing! lol

Yeah I saw the free dock promotions, Probubly a good thing to have if i get more Sigma glass (I mean, The 20mm f/1.4 looks fun..)


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,995 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1612
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Jan 31, 2016 19:53 as a reply to  @ KenjiS's post |  #12

Now I have the big lens sorted I'm also looking for something to complement it. I use a Sigma 20-40 f/2.8 EX DG as my standard zoom, but fancy the 18-35 f/1.8 A. What I really want though is the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 EX DC HSM OS, but they are like rocking horse poo to find. None on ebay in the EU let alone the UK. Found a couple of the non OS HSM versions. I had a look at an original non OS non HSM today at a local dealers. Not wowed a bit expensive but has 1year warranty. Got it on 7 day hold to make my mind up. Would love to see Sigma bring this back as a GV lens. It's a great focal length range to complement the new super tele zooms.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
5,866 posts
Gallery: 118 photos
Likes: 3923
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Feb 01, 2016 00:37 |  #13

BigAl007 wrote in post #17880916 (external link)
Now I have the big lens sorted I'm also looking for something to complement it. I use a Sigma 20-40 f/2.8 EX DG as my standard zoom, but fancy the 18-35 f/1.8 A. What I really want though is the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 EX DC HSM OS, but they are like rocking horse poo to find. None on ebay in the EU let alone the UK. Found a couple of the non OS HSM versions. I had a look at an original non OS non HSM today at a local dealers. Not wowed a bit expensive but has 1year warranty. Got it on 7 day hold to make my mind up. Would love to see Sigma bring this back as a GV lens. It's a great focal length range to complement the new super tele zooms.

Alan

Australian sales:

http://www.gumtree.com​.au …-for-eos-canon/1101623565 (external link)
Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 OS for EOS/Canon $850.00

http://www.gumtree.com​.au …-hsm-canon-fit/1098826591 (external link)
Sigma 50-150 f2.8 APO DC HSM CANON FIT $400.00 Negotiable


Dave
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
THREAD ­ STARTER
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,339 posts
Gallery: 527 photos
Likes: 2510
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Feb 01, 2016 00:44 |  #14

BigAl007 wrote in post #17880916 (external link)
Now I have the big lens sorted I'm also looking for something to complement it. I use a Sigma 20-40 f/2.8 EX DG as my standard zoom, but fancy the 18-35 f/1.8 A. What I really want though is the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 EX DC HSM OS, but they are like rocking horse poo to find. None on ebay in the EU let alone the UK. Found a couple of the non OS HSM versions. I had a look at an original non OS non HSM today at a local dealers. Not wowed a bit expensive but has 1year warranty. Got it on 7 day hold to make my mind up. Would love to see Sigma bring this back as a GV lens. It's a great focal length range to complement the new super tele zooms.

Alan

Maybe a full frame-capable 50-150 f/2.. Would give it some real interest, Think of it, all in one portrait lens, Great for video too :D


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,445 posts
Gallery: 108 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5555
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Feb 01, 2016 12:41 |  #15

Well, I sold my Sigma 50-500 OS on Amazon, and hope to buy a used 150-600 w/dock from a forum member here shortly. I hope I don't miss the 50mm at the wide end, I did use it a few times. I never tried the Tamron so I won't be able to compare it.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock
For Sale: Ladies Thirty-One Camera Sling

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

8,942 views & 4 likes for this thread
Tamron 150-600 vs Sigma C
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 Cmontgomery745
2333 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.