Tamron developing 150-600mm VC USD lens

hoodlum wrote in post #16463866
The 100-400 is a 15 year old lens. The image quality of the new Tamrom at 600 should exceed the Canon at 400 and smoke the 100-400 + TC. The fact that a 10x zoom (Sigma 50-500) could even be considered to match the 100-400 tells us how out of date the 100-400 lens is.

Some big assumptions being made on this thread about the quality of the optics of a 3rd party zoom. What makes people think the optics/AF of the Tamron will be superior to the Canon? Juat the fact it is newer?

Not sure about the Sigma matching the 100-400L either, I've only seen a small number of people claim that.

I agree the 100-400L is an old lens and the Tamron sounds very interesting but a lot of people are getting excited at what may be just another budget zoom to go with the (3) Sigmas currently on offer, none of which are that great.

Radders wrote in post #16464667
Would be great if it AF's with a 1.4TC, 210-840mm - Brilliant for airshows!

That would be nice. I might sell my canon 1.4x and replace it with kenko 1.4x if this is possible.

archer1960 wrote in post #16464972
Nope, not a chance in h***. And nobody here claimed it would, either.

No, it would be about a car cheap to be a 600/4 killer. Or probably even multiple cars short, since the 600/4 is a prime and hence much better optimized for 600mm performance. Not many buyers of a 10 kg bazooka with the price of a premium car, even if very good.

But it (obviously) will beat a 400/5.6 for 150-399mm.
And then we are hoping/dreaming it will do quite well for 400-600, hopefully matching/beating for the very last part.

And we hope it could play well compared to a 100-400 up to 400mm, hopefully even winning. But be a clear winner above, where the 100-400 runs out of length and starts to need crops or a TC.

The hope here isn't that Tamron will manage a super-lens, but a decent lens in a range where Canon is weak - fighting with one single prime in "normal" price range or a 15 year old zoom. And above that only having lenses costing at least 2-5 times more (200-400, 300/2.8 mk II, 400/2.8, 400/4 DO, 500/4, 600/4, 800/5.6)

Next hope is that if this lens do well, it will take enough Canon sales to get Canon to finally make a new 100-400, and maybe a 200-600, with reasonable prices.

HokkaidoStu wrote in post #16465104
Some big assumptions being made on this thread about the quality of the optics of a 3rd party zoom. What makes people think the optics/AF of the Tamron will be superior to the Canon? Juat the fact it is newer?

I don't agree on "big assumptions". And the main part of the hope lies in the range - it is competing 200mm above the reach of both the 100-400 and 400/5.6 without need for heavy crops or a TC.

pwm2 wrote in post #16465261
I don't agree on "big assumptions". And the main part of the hope lies in the range - it is competing 200mm above the reach of both the 100-400 and 400/5.6 without need for heavy crops or a TC.

The main assumption is that it is going to be any good over 400 which some posters seem to be taking for granted. I'm just saying it may not be so good, that's all. Of course I may be totally wrong .

It is possible to speculate in every possible direction. But the interesting part: do you see any indications or can elaborate on your thoughts why worry about the 600mm performance?

pwm2 wrote in post #16465459
It is possible to speculate in every possible direction. But the interesting part: do you see any indications or can elaborate on your thoughts why worry about the 600mm performance?

Think the test images I've seen so far lead me towards saying, inconclusive. Need to see more.

I'll put it to you this way, the Sigma 150-500 is 200mm longer than the Canon 300 f/4L. But I'd take the 300 f/4L and a 1.4 TC over the Sigma any day. Because it produces better images.

Me, I fear the lens won't be good enough but I'm hoping I'm wrong...

pwm2 wrote in post #16465459
It is possible to speculate in every possible direction. But the interesting part: do you see any indications or can elaborate on your thoughts why worry about the 600mm performance?

As others have said the samples aren't so conclusive but my main point is that this might be (or will be) just another cheapish third party zoom, albeit longer.

So you also wish it costed more then so it doesn't give a budget Sigma 500 vibe lol

dufflover wrote in post #16465762
So you also wish it costed more then so it doesn't give a budget Sigma 500 vibe lol

It does give me that budget Siggy vibe a little...............

I will be very happy if this lens does produce images this sharp @ 600mm, I just hope it's a fairly cheap lens!

http://blog.naver.com …nal_Park%252C_W​yoming.jpg

It should be noted that Tamron/Sigma/Tokina/..​. are very-price-pressed if they release a direct competitor to the 100-400. Even if the 100-400 is 15 years old, it's a Canon, and it's an L lens.

This time, Tamron have made a lens that is far enough from the 100-400 to not be constantly compared. This allows them to release a lens that has a price similar to the current 100-400. Which also then allows them to make a quite good lens, instead of just "as good as we can while still way cheaper".

So it is just the fact that the 150-600 is far enough from any Canon lens that makes me hope/believe that Tamron will aim much higher. There is a very significant window of opportunity here, and we have to hope Tamron did decide to run for the open goal. It they release just a so-so lens, they may never more get such an opportunity again. The competition on the lens market is likely to get tougher and tougher.

So far my main reason for thinking it'll be a decent is just in the last few years Sigma and Tamron have been on a run. Canon upped the quality with premium tele's (super and 70-200 II) and even the cheaper EF/EF-S lenses, but so have Sigma and Tamron.

Presuming they have designed the lens with 500-600mm to have the best performance, it's just unlikely they would not employ similar standards with it.

And the samples so far I think show it pretty well even though it's f/9.