Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3?!?!??!

http://www.canonrumors​.com …nt-tamron-150-600-f5-6-3/

Rival for the 150-500/50-500 OS apparently..

if it gets VC and USD then.. well this might be a very good alternative, Tamrons made some great lenses lately...

KenjiS wrote in post #15169743
http://www.canonrumors​.com …nt-tamron-150-600-f5-6-3/

Rival for the 150-500/50-500 OS apparently..

if it gets VC and USD then.. well this might be a very good alternative, Tamrons made some great lenses lately...

Sigma 50-500 OS HSM is 22 elements in 6 groups and 150-500 OS HSM is 21 elements in 15 groups. The Tamron is 18 elements in 13 groups.

While the # of elements doesn't tell the whole story behind lens performance, it seems like many of the recently introduced high performance telephoto zooms are quite compliacted designs (e.g. the Canon 70-200 II with 23 elements in 19 groups).

My only complaint is the 6.3 aperture at 500mm. I am personally waiting to see the official price mark of the 200-400 f/4 1.4x from Canon. With a 1D4's high ISO performance it to me becomes easily a great sport lens even for night shots and then a good wildlife lens during the day.

crbeveri wrote in post #15170504
My only complaint is the 6.3 aperture at 500mm. I am personally waiting to see the official price mark of the 200-400 f/4 1.4x from Canon. With a 1D4's high ISO performance it to me becomes easily a great sport lens even for night shots and then a good wildlife lens during the day.

1. its 600mm, Not 500mm

2. its likely going to be $1500 or less not $10,000+

KenjiS wrote in post #15170570
1. its 600mm, Not 500mm

2. its likely going to be $1500 or less not $10,000+

That's my fault for miss reading the 600 >.< my apologizes

Even still at 600mm f/6.3... I'd gladly pay a few grand more for it to be f/5-5.6 or even fixed f/5.6. I do believe that the new version II lenses from canon are priced high but for what I shoot I do need speed. Hell... I think the new 400 f/2.8 II from canon is crazy priced when the 500mm f/4 is cheaper and if shooting with the 1Dx you need the 500 as the 400 is too short on a FF sensor but that's just my opinion.

KenjiS wrote in post #15170570
1. its 600mm, Not 500mm

2. its likely going to be $1500 or less not $10,000+

I could use 600mm
I would take a look if it's sharp and only $1500

^- indeed... Heres hoping Tamron makes this a winner! Could be a great hiking lens

Nature, airshows, and the list of things that I would use it for grows and grows...

996gt2 wrote in post #15169940
Sigma 50-500 OS HSM is 22 elements in 6 groups and 150-500 OS HSM is 21 elements in 15 groups. The Tamron is 18 elements in 13 groups.

While the # of elements doesn't tell the whole story behind lens performance, it seems like many of the recently introduced high performance telephoto zooms are quite compliacted designs (e.g. the Canon 70-200 II with 23 elements in 19 groups).

Definitely depends on the design and the amount of special elements that are used too, though.

Canon's 100-400mm is extremely sharp, prime sharp at the 400mm end with a good copy. It uses 18 elements.

Guess it depends on what price point Tamron is targeting. Hopefully it'll be about a $1500 lens and will have an AF limiter and super fast AF.

woos wrote in post #15218116
Definitely depends on the design and the amount of special elements that are used too, though.

Canon's 100-400mm is extremely sharp, prime sharp at the 400mm end with a good copy. It uses 18 elements.

Guess it depends on what price point Tamron is targeting. Hopefully it'll be about a $1500 lens and will have an AF limiter and super fast AF.

Yes, but the 100-400mm is also an old lens design dating back to 1998. If Canon introduced a 100-400 II and targeted high optical performance, you can bet it would have more than 20 elements in it. The fact that the Tamron has a comparatively simpler design (for a 2012 lens) doesn't lead me to have high hopes for its optical performance at 500mm. But who knows, maybe they can pull off something unexpected.

996gt2 wrote in post #15218465
Yes, but the 100-400mm is also an old lens design dating back to 1998. If Canon introduced a 100-400 II and targeted high optical performance, you can bet it would have more than 20 elements in it. The fact that the Tamron has a comparatively simpler design (for a 2012 lens) doesn't lead me to have high hopes for its optical performance at 500mm. But who knows, maybe they can pull off something unexpected.

Maybe, or they might use some of their more advanced glass in it... better coatings too

Even the 50-500 OS which is very good isnt quite as good as the 100-400

KenjiS wrote in post #15220423
Maybe, or they might use some of their more advanced glass in it... better coatings too

Even the 50-500 OS which is very good isnt quite as good as the 100-400

10x zoom that goes to 500mm vs a 4x zoom that goes to 400mm...not really apples to apples there.

996gt2 wrote in post #15220682
10x zoom that goes to 500mm vs a 4x zoom that goes to 400mm...not really apples to apples there.

Its quite close, and far better than either copy of the 150-500 i had

KenjiS wrote in post #15220878
Its quite close, and far better than either copy of the 150-500 i had

Indeed, lol. The 50-500mm OS is, in my experience, WAY better than the 150-500mm. It's really quite close to the 100-400mm.

The "new" Tamron starts at 150mm, instead of the 100mm of the Canon 100-400mm, 80mm of the Nikon 100-400mm, or 50mm instead of the Sigma 50-500mm. I think that will be its main competition. The Tamron supposedly has 4 special elements in it, compared to the Sigma's 3 (or cheaper sigma's 2).. (or maybe 4 and 3, I forget!) Who knows.

Tamron is probably trading something for it though, like crazy high vignetting or something.

I wanna see a new Sigma product in that range, with a focus limiter and FLD glass.

^- Hmn, Trading vignetting might not be a horrible tradeoff if you think about it... On a 7D the vignetting wouldnt be a big deal..

Yes it would suck on FF but I'm thinking along the lines of "most wildlife folks in this price range stick crop"