Tamron SP 150-600mm Di VC USD

Andrushka wrote in post #16650329
Wow - that is some big talk. Sounds like this dude is really "sold" on the practicality and real world use of the Tamron. Interesting

quite interesting indeed, he will replace his canon 100-400 with the tamron, and the extra reach is the main motivation. thanks for sharing.

JVthePT wrote in post #16646378
Here's a few I shot out my open window, on a tripod.
Someone tell me what I can do to sharpen these up or am I expecting too much?
These are SOOC.

You have image editing on, so I assume this is OK? I just had a play with it, I think it's pretty good if you ask me! I've only sharpened the bird too.. 50% & 0.4 Radius.

1600px http://oi59.tinypic.co​m/9sq79g.jpg

I don't see it as a total replacement for some stuff; It's more of a compliment, to me. After doing much waffling, deep thought and reviewing of my current images, I'm going to keep the lens for now and practice with it a bit more.

One of the primary things that I like with the 100-400 over the Tamron is the MFD. At 6ft, it's three feet closer than the Tamron, which can make a difference with less standoff-ish. Due to the size/weight, it is much more portable than the Tamron, and I'll likely take it for extended hikes than the Tammy.

However, if shooting in situations where heavy cropping is normally needed for the Canon, having this thing available will be very nice. Especially out Eagle watching, where the viewing access is normally across a good sized river.

So, at least for now, both clubs'll stay in the bag and we'll see how things go with more experience.

jodelak wrote in post #16650463
quite interesting indeed, he will replace his canon 100-400 with the tamron, and the extra reach is the main motivation. thanks for sharing.

Obviously one can find support for any opinion held, but to see someone with a decent amount of experience in said genre getting these type of results in the field is a good nod for the Tamron. Not to mention several POTN users who are also getting very pleasing results with this lens, its very clear that it is a capable lens in the right hands.

yeah, I'm keeping mine as well. I can always sell it I guess, but I think it will be good for me for now.
I'm just getting into bird photography, so I dont NEED to spend 2-3k right away on some fancy lens. Also, it won't get as used quite as much as other general lenses. But so far, overall I've been happy with it. it will just take some more practice with my camera/lens to get the shots I am after. It's alot about technique as you guys are learning I think. Also having proper shutter speeds/exposing right.

Snydremark wrote in post #16650532
I don't see it as a total replacement for some stuff; It's more of a compliment, to me. After doing much waffling, deep thought and reviewing of my current images, I'm going to keep the lens for now and practice with it a bit more.

One of the primary things that I like with the 100-400 over the Tamron is the MFD. At 6ft, it's three feet closer than the Tamron, which can make a difference with less standoff-ish. Due to the size/weight, it is much more portable than the Tamron, and I'll likely take it for extended hikes than the Tammy.

However, if shooting in situations where heavy cropping is normally needed for the Canon, having this thing available will be very nice. Especially out Eagle watching, where the viewing access is normally across a good sized river.

So, at least for now, both clubs'll stay in the bag and we'll see how things go with more experience.

hi eric, if i may ask a question, say after a few months of using the tamron and you are comfortable with it, and on 1 particular birding day you saw a bird that is a lifer for you, and it is on a distance that is within the 100-400 reach. would you put the canon 100-400? or the tamron 150-600?

jodelak wrote in post #16650579
hi eric, if i may ask a question, say after a few months of using the tamron and you are comfortable with it, and on 1 particular birding day you saw a bird that is a lifer for you, and it is on a distance that is within the 100-400 reach. would you put the canon 100-400? or the tamron 150-600?

(asar) I bet which ever he can reach faster.

Andrushka wrote in post #16650535
Obviously one can find support for any opinion held, but to see someone with a decent amount of experience in said genre getting these type of results in the field is a good nod for the Tamron. Not to mention several POTN users who are also getting very pleasing results with this lens, its very clear that it is a capable lens in the right hands.

i agree, and i think reviews like this is getting more and more support, not to mention what others had posted here.

Peter2516 wrote in post #16650587
(asar) I bet which ever he can reach faster.

lol, good answer . ok i am opening that question to everybody who have the tamron and a similar lens

jodelak wrote in post #16650579
hi eric, if i may ask a question, say after a few months of using the tamron and you are comfortable with it, and on 1 particular birding day you saw a bird that is a lifer for you, and it is on a distance that is within the 100-400 reach. would you put the canon 100-400? or the tamron 150-600?

Peter's most likely right; I would use whichever one was easiest to get the bird framed with. Right now, if neither one were currently mounted and I was having to choose on the fly, I'd grab the Canon; but, assuming that I find my comfort zone with the Tamron and get any bugs worked out of the system, I'd probably grab the Tammy.

I keep recalling back to the first two months that I had the Canon, years ago. I was absolutely convinced that the design was wonky, that it couldn't be shot in anything less than broad daylight and that there was no way I'd continue to use it. Now, it's my favorite lens to use and it'll be a cold day in hell before it leaves my possession, regardless of the other guns in the cabinet.

So, if I was so certain of that lenses "defects" and "problems" back then, who's to say that I won't feel the same about this lens in 12mo or so? There are some hiccups with it that mean I'll probably have to send it in to Tamron for a checkup, just to be certain, but I've done that with just about every piece of gear that I currently own anyway. <shrug> If there's something legitimately wonky (as appears to be the case with Jason's lens), it would be a shame to write off such a good tool, completely, for something that a tech in a lab can tweak and fix.

[QUOTE=Radders;1665052​5]You have image editing on, so I assume this is OK? I just had a play with it, I think it's pretty good if you ask me! I've only sharpened the bird too.. 50% & 0.4 Radius.

1600px

Looks good, thanks!

thanks man, i think its a great answer considering that this lens (tamron) is new i understand the reservation when it comes to 'crunch' time. its really good that this lens is getting a lot of interest and users already and the feedback that tamron will get from the users will make this product better in the future.

peter actually brought up a really good topic. and this question is for everybody who have both lenses. if you will go birding, what would be the lens mounted on your camera?

I have to go page after page just to find a few images. Isn't this a lens image sample thread?

Sibil wrote in post #16651315
I have to go page after page just to find a few images. Isn't this a lens image sample thread?

no...it's in the discussion section, hence the posts without images

here's the sample images thread:
https://photography-on-the.net …48082&highlight​=150-600mm

Anyone have an idea how this lens would do for sports Photography? I'm guessing it would be a little too slow?