Tamron developing 150-600mm VC USD lens

Well, from what I've seen so far, this lens appears to be very similar in sharpness/ect to the Canon 100-400. But I haven't actually used the Canon personally yet, and I know we can't say for sure how much better or worse it is.

But, if I were to buy the Canon 100-400 new, it would be almost 2x the price of the Tamron... Is the Canon 2x better than the Tamron... probably not. Although the Canon might keep its value better, and is probably lighter. But I'm not sure I'd like the push/pull design, plus the Tamron gives us 200mm more reach, which is always welcome.

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #16579568
Well, from what I've seen so far, this lens appears to be very similar in sharpness/ect to the Canon 100-400. But I haven't actually used the Canon personally yet, and I know we can't say for sure how much better or worse it is.

But, if I were to buy the Canon 100-400 new, it would be almost 2x the price of the Tamron... Is the Canon 2x better than the Tamron... probably not. Although the Canon might keep its value better, and is probably lighter. But I'm not sure I'd like the push/pull design, plus the Tamron gives us 200mm more reach, which is always welcome.

Don't believe the Canon 100-400 new is almost twice the price......$1559 on Amazon & preorder on Tamron is $1069, but get your point.

Skidlid wrote in post #16578789
More samples here...click on photo for full size image. This lens is looking better all the time.

http://www.dcfever.com​/lens/viewsamples.php?​set=951

I think this site is down now/might be getting hammered. I was trying to download the high-res images, but it was very slow/would stall out. But from what I did see, they were looking pretty good!

shutterbug guy wrote in post #16578805
I have the 70-200L 2.8 II with the TC 2X III and just for reference, the 100-400L walks all over that combination. It is a fair and useful tool with the 2X III just not as good as the 100-400 is @ 400. Imho of course.

Before I bought a 2x TC III for a 70-200II I spent some time looking at comparisons with a 100-400L, and it seems to swing either way (I believe there's quite a lot of sample variation with the 100-400L, so there were many conflicting reviews).

That said, the AF speed on the 70-200II does seem to take quite a hit with a 2x TC, so I could readily believe a 100-400L would be much more usable combination in the field.

warrick wrote in post #16577821
There is some raw files here
http://camahoy.com/

The sharpest one, the first one with the sign, isn't as sharp as the AA filter allows, but it has a lot of content at the pixel level and sharpens very well, exposing almost nothing in the form of aberrations; just a nice, natural roll-off of contrast at high frequencies. I'm going to feel guilty spending only US$1069 on this lens!

I'm not going to shoot at slow shutter speeds on a tripod; I will shoot hand-held in M mode with auto-ISO, at speeds of up to 1/640, with a 1.4x Kenko DGX for 840mm (817mm, actually). I might need a rubberband to prevent zoom creep, shooting upwards.

Hey, there's a new video on that site now!

Talley wrote in post #16579374
We hit up the zoo about 20 times a year. This will be the perfect lens for my trips.

Still think 100-400 or 50-500 might be better? At least when I imagine the city zoos here in Aus where 150 is a tad long at the min end.

kdrk888 wrote in post #16579359
Check out https://www.facebook.c​om/TamronPhotoClub.

They posted the newer 100% cropped pictures in the last couple hours. You don't really need to understand what was written. The pictures speak for themselves. The Tamron Club in Hong Kong organized an outing for testing the lens.

Too bad no f/8 100% crop. Looks pretty good for 600mm wide open but as an absolute IQ level wouldn't say it's anything special over something like the 100-400 (I'm not silly to compare it to something kickass like the 70-200 LOL). But if it sharpens up a lot with 1/3 or 2/3 f-stop down like my Sigma does you'd be laughing to the bank.

sploo wrote in post #16579822
Before I bought a 2x TC III for a 70-200II I spent some time looking at comparisons with a 100-400L, and it seems to swing either way (I believe there's quite a lot of sample variation with the 100-400L, so there were many conflicting reviews).

That said, the AF speed on the 70-200II does seem to take quite a hit with a 2x TC, so I could readily believe a 100-400L would be much more usable combination in the field.

I had a 100-400, sold it and got a 70-200 II w/ TCs when I got my Sigma 120-30, then got a 100-400 again later on again anyway because I missed the fold up travel size (the only 400mm to be 70-200 size transportable) and I did have issues with the AF reliability of the TC setup. It was fast, but prone to hunting a lot more than the 100-400.

gabebalazs wrote in post #16579261
Yeah, I'm also interested in this lens as a lighter backup for my Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS + TC. Little over half the weight.

Fair call. The Sigma gets heavy especially when holding it awkwardly, e.g. LiveView low-angle shot.

Talley wrote in post #16579374
We hit up the zoo about 20 times a year. This will be the perfect lens for my trips.

My new work place has some trails in the back. I am hoping to use it for some bird shots. Used to have 500mm f4 IS but not much time for that serious photography anymore.

I just picked up 55-250 IS STM for the zoo for use on my EOS-M.

dufflover wrote in post #16580115
I had a 100-400, sold it and got a 70-200 II w/ TCs when I got my Sigma 120-30, then got a 100-400 again later on again anyway because I missed the fold up travel size (the only 400mm to be 70-200 size transportable) and I did have issues with the AF reliability of the TC setup. It was fast, but prone to hunting a lot more than the 100-400.

Agreed, that sounds logical. For me, the drop in AF reliability on a 70-200 with a 2x TC is as big an issue as the drop in quality. Perhaps it's more obvious because it usually focuses so fast (with no TC), but I can readily believe that a 100-400 might do a better job in that comparison.

I also feel (empirically, I've never spent the time to test it) that the IS doesn't work as well with a 2xTC installed. What I mean is that it seems to give me fewer "stops of assistance", even allowing for the fact you'd base it off 1/400 rather than 1/200 as a minimum speed without stabilisation. That said, I'm told the IS on the 100-400 isn't to great.

If this Tamron is better at 400mm @f8 than a 70-200II with a 2xTC (and better at 600mm @f8 vs. just cropping a 400mm shot) then I'd be very interested. I've not yet seen a comparison on that regard yet though.

Not sure what you're after with that first comparison. 100-400 is better than 70-200 II w/ TC at 400mm but both are already pretty good at f/6.3, certainly f/7.1 or f/8. Even if the Tamron was "better" at f/8 it'd be at the level of splitting hairs.

Wow all pictures in that FB link are impressive. I am convinced that this will be my next lens I am glad that I waited.

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #16580071
Hey, there's a new video on that site now!

Wow very nice video looks really sharp at 600mm. I am so excited. I think I am going to say goodbye with Kenko 2.0X TC to help me fund this lens.

dufflover wrote in post #16580291
Not sure what you're after with that first comparison. 100-400 is better than 70-200 II w/ TC at 400mm but both are already pretty good at f/6.3, certainly f/7.1 or f/8. Even if the Tamron was "better" at f/8 it'd be at the level of splitting hairs.

From a fair bit of testing and shooting with my 70-200II + 2xTC combo I've always felt it needs to be stopped down quite a way (f8, f11) to regain some quality, so if the Tamron were decent at 400mm and f8 it'd be better choice.

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #16579700
I think this site is down now/might be getting hammered. I was trying to download the high-res images, but it was very slow/would stall out. But from what I did see, they were looking pretty good!

I just visited the link I agree based on the pictures here it is sharp at 600mm with f6.3 much more if you stop down to f8.

The temptation is growing inside me to pre-order the lens... I should stay away from this thread (and the sample photos too)

UPDATE: my wife told me to pre-order it And who am I to argue with her

As soon as I get it I will, I will put it to the test and compare it to my current Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS + 2x TC rig.