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 Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
Thread started 13 Dec 2013 (Friday) 23:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tamron SP 150-600mm Di VC USD

 
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:24 |  #1816

Peter2516 wrote in post #16695936 (external link)
Hi Matt yeah that was me. I had a feeling it was you also. Yeah I saw you looking in their direction and that is good that you are tracking the wind surfers just fine. I think the AF is functioning well with my lens too. I think I just have to be familiar with AF limiter switch and know the distance of my target.

Btw I stayed until 2:30 and the rain is kind of on and off and hails also around 1:30pm, this lens did very well in the rain but I have to cover my 7D :).

Yeah, I was only able to stay for about 30 min. I would have stayed longer. At least until the hail :P. It actually wasn't that bad in the rain/that cold. There were alot of birds around! :). I got some surprisingly decent shots of the wind surfers, 1/2 mile away. I can pretty clearly see their faces at 100%. I'll run this DxO on it, and see how good or not it looks. I might post the results here in a while.


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,318 posts
Gallery: 960 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24660
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:31 |  #1817

Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #16695978 (external link)
Yeah, I was only able to stay for about 30 min. I would have stayed longer. At least until the hail :P. It actually wasn't that bad in the rain/that cold. There were alot of birds around! :). I got some surprisingly decent shots of the wind surfers, 1/2 mile away. I can pretty clearly see their faces at 100%. I'll run this DxO on it, and see how good or not it looks. I might post the results here in a while.

Wow that is great. The Eagle finally tried the scoots but no luck and gave up and perched on the tree where you were standing while you testing your AF with wind surfers. I took a picture and got surprise when I open the file I have clear shot of the eagle considering the bad weather.


Peter
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/peterbangay​an (external link)
EOS 5D Mark IV, 1Dx1, 7D Mark I & II/Canon T2i Gripped/EF 500mm f/4L IS USM MK1 / EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM / EF100 -400 f4.5-5.6L USM/ EFS 10-22mm/EFS 17-55mm/EFS 18-200mm/Canon 1.4x II/Canon 2x III/ 430EXII / 580EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,415 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 465
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:32 |  #1818

RAW-Shooter wrote in post #16695921 (external link)
In general you have to expose properly to begin with and then ETTR. One of the real good threads about ETTR is here: https://photography-on-the.net …p?t=744235&high​light=ETTR


Cheers.

Yep, have been using it for years, but the issue is the impracticality when you're shutter speed limited (as is likely when pointing the Tamzooka at a small bird).

Usually it's better the bump the ISO up a stop (as you get analogue gains) vs. dragging an exposure slider up in post. However there comes a point were you don't actually get any useful gains, and you'd be better off staying at the lower ISO setting (but using the faster shutter speed as if you had changed), then lighten in post (as this protects your highlights).

I suppose, if shutter speed limited, there might be some combination whereby a degree of ETTR with a higher ISO speed (and not raising your shutter speed much) would result in a better image than using the same ISO and shutter speed with a "normal" exposure. It's not something I've tried though.

Given that the analogue signal-to-noise gains from increased ISO tail off somewhere around ISO 1600->3200 on a 5D2 (IRC - may be lower) then I can see how, for instance, ISO 1600 at 1/125 (instead of 1/200) might be better than ISO 800 at 1/100, then drag it down 2/3 stop in post.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,318 posts
Gallery: 960 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24660
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:38 as a reply to  @ post 16610726 |  #1819

Awesome display HEADSHOTSZX.


Peter
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/peterbangay​an (external link)
EOS 5D Mark IV, 1Dx1, 7D Mark I & II/Canon T2i Gripped/EF 500mm f/4L IS USM MK1 / EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM / EF100 -400 f4.5-5.6L USM/ EFS 10-22mm/EFS 17-55mm/EFS 18-200mm/Canon 1.4x II/Canon 2x III/ 430EXII / 580EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,318 posts
Gallery: 960 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24660
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:41 as a reply to  @ post 16610726 |  #1820

IMAGE: https://s2.yimg.com/sm/5550/12558712163_aacf3730f3_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​558712163/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00061 (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3763/12559087714_fc19a6790f_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​559087714/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00036-Edit (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3781/12558684253_140e827081_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​558684253/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00084 (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5539/12559063624_50eba7f39e_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​559063624/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00074-Edit (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

Peter
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/peterbangay​an (external link)
EOS 5D Mark IV, 1Dx1, 7D Mark I & II/Canon T2i Gripped/EF 500mm f/4L IS USM MK1 / EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM / EF100 -400 f4.5-5.6L USM/ EFS 10-22mm/EFS 17-55mm/EFS 18-200mm/Canon 1.4x II/Canon 2x III/ 430EXII / 580EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1061
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:45 |  #1821

sploo wrote in post #16695896 (external link)
Yes, I find the same. For some scenarios (e.g. landscape work) ETTR is very useful, as you can use longer exposures to increase the signal-to-noise ratio. However, when I'm pushed for needing higher ISO settings, it's usually because I need a faster shutter speed - therefore overexposing using a longer shutter speed is rarely useful.

I've seen it mentioned quite a few times that the 7D really benefits from a bit of ETTR (in terms of reducing noise) when using higher ISO settings - but it's always struck me as counter to the point of using a higher ISO setting (i.e. keeping the shutter speed up).

I suppose there may be scenarios where you have a (just) sufficient shutter speed at some ISO setting, and the noise will be better if you go up one ISO stop (e.g. from 1000 to 2000) but then over expose slightly by not speeding up your shutter by a full stop (e.g. instead of going from 1/100 to 1/200, go to 1/125 or 1/160).

My opinion is the same regarding ETTR.

I know many people swear that it is great and all that but, just like you said, most of the time in a high ISO situation we are already shooting at the slowest "acceptable" shutter speed.
If let's say a low-light indoor event calls for a minimum of 1/60 shutter speed (e.g. people socializing, chatting, so there is some movement), and you're already at f/2.8 with a 24-70 2.8 lens, obviously you'll get whatever ISO that gives you proper exposure, let's say ISO 1600. Now, how much better off would I be by ETTR and either shooting 1/30s (can't do that), or bumping the ISO to 3200, then pulling it back in post?

I am aware that there are some complex signal-to-noise numbers involved here, but according to my tests, the end result is pretty much the same with my cameras. Shooting at 3200 with +1 EV ETTR then pulled back by a stop results a very similar image to shooting at 1600 at 0 EV. Again, I cannot always sacrifice shutter speed.
Of course major underexposure is a problem and should be avoided but I'm talking about proper exposure vs ETTR.

But if people believe that they get better results with ETTR, where they cannot sacrifice shutter speed (hence bumping the ISO up), that's great for them, I'm not against anyone using ETTR. I just don't see the benefit when you're already shooting at the lowest limit in terms of your minimum shutter speed, which you cannot afford to sacrifice in a given situation.


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,318 posts
Gallery: 960 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24660
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:46 |  #1822

IMAGE: https://s2.yimg.com/sm/5550/12558712163_aacf3730f3_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​558712163/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00061 (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3763/12559087714_fc19a6790f_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​559087714/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00036-Edit (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

Peter
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/peterbangay​an (external link)
EOS 5D Mark IV, 1Dx1, 7D Mark I & II/Canon T2i Gripped/EF 500mm f/4L IS USM MK1 / EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM / EF100 -400 f4.5-5.6L USM/ EFS 10-22mm/EFS 17-55mm/EFS 18-200mm/Canon 1.4x II/Canon 2x III/ 430EXII / 580EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:53 |  #1823

Nice ones! I want to get some nice shots of the Bufflehead, but they don't like to get too close usually.


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:55 |  #1824

I understand that when distance restricted higher pixel density camera (typically crop camera) will give better result. On the other hand it seems to me that if it's possible to have the same frame using FF and crop camera, the PQ on FF is much better than crop body. So far most of those impressive pics I've seen were taken with FF camera with 150-600. Right now I'm not sure if a crop camera will work better for me or 600mm reach is enough on FF ?


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kickflipkid687
Senior Member
921 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jan 2014
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:57 |  #1825

gabebalazs wrote in post #16696031 (external link)
My opinion is the same regarding ETTR.

I know many people swear that it is great and all that but, just like you said, most of the time in a high ISO situation we are already shooting at the slowest "acceptable" shutter speed.
If let's say a low-light indoor event calls for a minimum of 1/60 shutter speed (e.g. people socializing, chatting, so there is some movement), and you're already at f/2.8 with a 24-70 2.8 lens, obviously you'll get whatever ISO that gives you proper exposure, let's say ISO 1600. Now, how much better off would I be by ETTR and either shooting 1/30s (can't do that), or bumping the ISO to 3200, then pulling it back in post?

I am aware that there are some complex signal-to-noise numbers involved here, but according to my tests, the end result is pretty much the same with my cameras. Shooting at 3200 with +1 EV ETTR then pulled back by a stop results a very similar image to shooting at 1600 at 0 EV. Again, I cannot always sacrifice shutter speed.
Of course major underexposure is a problem and should be avoided but I'm talking about proper exposure vs ETTR.

But if people believe that they get better results with ETTR, where they cannot sacrifice shutter speed (hence bumping the ISO up), that's great for them, I'm not against anyone using ETTR. I just don't see the benefit when you're already shooting at the lowest limit in terms of your minimum shutter speed, which you cannot afford to sacrifice in a given situation.

Yeah, I agree. I just play it by ear when outside in the field. If my shutter speeds are already suffering alot, I'll just have to deal with a bit darker exposures possibly, or at least, not pushing to the right as much as I'd like. Although, if exposing to the right is not affecting the shutter speed too badly, I'll try it.


My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com​/photos/86957042@N07/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,318 posts
Gallery: 960 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24660
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 09:58 |  #1826

genjurok wrote in post #16696049 (external link)
It seems to me that if it's possible to have the same frame using FF and crop camera, the PQ on FF is much better than crop body. So far most of those impressive pics I've seen were taken with FF camera with 150-600.

That would be awesome to your 6D. Are you planning to get this lens or you already have one?

Considering how bad (raining, hailing :), weather condition from yesterday I am very satisfied with this lens and it was soaking wet accept my 7D because I cover it but still got wet. I can not wait to have a nice weather to try this lens out specially during summer.

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7457/12591307615_7f7c0e162b_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​591307615/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00085 (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7340/12591300455_756df703ea_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​591300455/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00091-Edit (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://ycpi-farm4.staticflickr.com/3727/12591285475_af02af8a23_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​591285475/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00257 (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

Peter
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/peterbangay​an (external link)
EOS 5D Mark IV, 1Dx1, 7D Mark I & II/Canon T2i Gripped/EF 500mm f/4L IS USM MK1 / EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM / EF100 -400 f4.5-5.6L USM/ EFS 10-22mm/EFS 17-55mm/EFS 18-200mm/Canon 1.4x II/Canon 2x III/ 430EXII / 580EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,508 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 1561
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Feb 17, 2014 10:12 as a reply to  @ Peter2516's post |  #1827

mike325 wrote in post #16695834 (external link)
Really thinkin of getting this lens. I have a 70-200 f4 with 1.4xii with a t1i that I use for wildlife. My question is do you think this lens will work well with this body? I know most reviews and people who have this lens use nicer, more recen bodies.

What do you think? Thanks. The images in this thread are making it very hard to resist.

You're over-thinking it, Mike :) Don't worry so much about which body others are using; the lens goes on any of them. It will take more work to get used to working with and to do it well than the kit you're currently using, but would still be a great upgrade if you want to bird.


- 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
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Feb 17, 2014 10:14 |  #1828

Peter2516 wrote in post #16696055 (external link)
That would be awesome to your 6D. Are you planning to get this lens or you already have one?

From yesterday.
QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …eterbangayan/12​591307615/  (external link)
1402_untitled_00085 (external link) by Peter Bangayan (external link), on Flickr

I don't have one yet, but I'm really tempted. From the pics I've seen, the PQ looks very good on FF camera except 600mm, which is soft wide open but good at f/8. I might get it or wait until Canon releases 100-400L II and see how good it is with 1.4X TC. If at 560mm f/8 it's sharper than the Tammy 600mm f/8 and the price isn't too much over $2k, I might get it instead.


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter2516
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
26,318 posts
Gallery: 960 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 24660
Joined Oct 2010
Location: State of Washington
     
Feb 17, 2014 10:17 |  #1829

genjurok wrote in post #16696090 (external link)
I don't have one yet, but I'm really tempted. From the pics I've seen, the PQ looks very good on FF camera except 600mm, which is soft wide open but good at f/8. I might get it or wait until Canon releases 100-400L II and see how good it is with 1.4X TC. If at 560mm f/8 it's sharper than the Tammy 600mm f/8 and the price isn't too much over $2k, I might get it instead.

Sounds like a good plan to me. My 7D is almost 4 yrs old I am now considering 5D mkiii or that rumor 7d II. I am just waiting a few more months for the 7d II if it is true.


Peter
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/peterbangay​an (external link)
EOS 5D Mark IV, 1Dx1, 7D Mark I & II/Canon T2i Gripped/EF 500mm f/4L IS USM MK1 / EF70-200mm f2.8L IS II USM / EF100 -400 f4.5-5.6L USM/ EFS 10-22mm/EFS 17-55mm/EFS 18-200mm/Canon 1.4x II/Canon 2x III/ 430EXII / 580EXII.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
archer1960
Goldmember
Avatar
4,930 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 81
Joined Jul 2010
     
Feb 17, 2014 10:45 |  #1830

genjurok wrote in post #16696049 (external link)
I understand that when distance restricted higher pixel density camera (typically crop camera) will give better result. On the other hand it seems to me that if it's possible to have the same frame using FF and crop camera, the PQ on FF is much better than crop body. So far most of those impressive pics I've seen were taken with FF camera with 150-600. Right now I'm not sure if a crop camera will work better for me or 600mm reach is enough on FF ?

That's something only you can answer. If you can fill the frame on a FF body, your images will almost certainly be somewhat better than the same framing on a crop (assuming approximately equal numbers of total pixels on both bodies). But if you can just fill the frame on a crop and therefore can't do so on a FF, then it becomes a more difficult comparison. Your individual pixels will be better on the FF, but won't have as many of them in use. Personally, I find myself constantly focal-length limited, so a good crop body is likely to give me better results than a FF and cropping the image in post.

YMMV, however, and in low light the results might be reversed because the FF bodies generally have much better ISO capabilities than crops.


Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.

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

2,454,668 views & 6,002 likes for this thread
Tamron SP 150-600mm Di VC USD
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
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 Addisonadley
1026 guests, 218 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.