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

woos wrote in post #15257900
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.

close but still not "L" image quality

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.

200-400 f/4 1.4x will cost 8+k

watt100 wrote in post #15258080
close but still not "L" image quality

Its better design, wider, longer, and has better is/os.

Minor difference in image quality.

I own 100-400 and if I were buying telezoom now, I would go with sigma 50-500.

Is on 100-400 is really bad by today standards. My gf tamron 70-300 vc has better image stabilizer by a mile.

nekrosoft13 wrote in post #15296200
Its better design, wider, longer, and has better is/os.

Minor difference in image quality.

I own 100-400 and if I were buying telezoom now, I would go with sigma 50-500.

Is on 100-400 is really bad by today standards. My gf tamron 70-300 vc has better image stabilizer by a mile.

Its also black, in my experience this enabled me to get -physically- closer to the birds i was trying to shoot and caused a lot less problems with idiotic neighbors than my 100-400...

This lens might be great for surf photos. I'm on a budget and looking for a bigger than 500mm focal length lens, this one might come in handy.

KenjiS wrote in post #15296582
Its also black, in my experience this enabled me to get -physically- closer to the birds i was trying to shoot and caused a lot less problems with idiotic neighbors than my 100-400...

if you had 100-400 would you trade it for 50-500 OS?

nekrosoft13 wrote in post #15311003
if you had 100-400 would you trade it for 50-500 OS?

At the time? I almost did, the only reason i did not was the MASSIVE difference in price i was going to have to shell out to keep the 50-500, Like.. $500 ish because when i had it it was brand new... Optically they're VERY close(Equal at f/8, at 5.6 vs 6.3 the Canon is better by a hair), but the 50-500 has a far better OS system and other things that makes it a better lens most of the time

if i was going to buy one now id buy the 50-500 OS, if i had the 100-400 id try to trade or get a used one to lessen the financial impact...