7d needs more zoom

I’m lookin to gain some more reach and am looking at 150-600 tamron, or the canon 70-200 with a 1.4 or 2 extender to gain the reach, and have a smaller lens that can be carried a bit easier.

In all honesty the size doesn’t matter, and ive got about 2k for funds.
Of course looking at image quality, and longevity.
Right now I have a 7d, I really like it. I hope the rumored 7dII is a reality as I will pick it up for some upgrades…or maybe pick up a full frame, ahh decisions.
any ideas or suggestions on ups or downs on zoom lens?

thanks

bk2life wrote in post #17000880
I’m lookin to gain some more reach and am looking at 150-600 tamron, or the canon 70-200 with a 1.4 or 2 extender to gain the reach, and have a smaller lens that can be carried a bit easier.

In all honesty the size doesn’t matter, and ive got about 2k for funds.
Of course looking at image quality, and longevity.
Right now I have a 7d, I really like it. I hope the rumored 7dII is a reality as I will pick it up for some upgrades…or maybe pick up a full frame, ahh decisions.
any ideas or suggestions on ups or downs on zoom lens?

thanks

Among the super telephoto lenses to consider are the Sigma 150-500mm OS, used for this image.

Heya,

Don't bother with a TC unless it's a 400mm lens with F2.8.

Consider the 150-600 Tamron if you want wildlife and reach, but not extreme action. It will do the work on the APS-C and gather enough light at ISO 800~1600 on that 7D for good shutter speeds. Getting a 200mm with a 1.4 extender does nothing for the efforts. The 2x just gets you to 400mm, which is a waste too since you can get a 400mm F5.6 for cheaper and it will be better in every way for reaching out, being fast, and being sharp. Going past 400mm is where it gets clunky or you have to spend money. You can either get the 50-500mm Sigma. Or you can get the 150-600mm Tamron. Alternatively, you could get a Canon 300mm F4L and use a 2.0x doubler (600mm F8), but ultimately you're better off with a base 600mm lens here.

It really depends on what you're trying to shoot. I use 600mm primarily for wildlife reach.

600mm on APS-C to give you an idea:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/mYdY​sp

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/mYhn​o7

I just got the 150-600mm a few weeks ago. I just want to warn you that it is a heavy lens. I don't use a neck strap just a wrist strap so now it a bit of a challenge hooking it to my belt while at rest. Ive only gone out a couple of times so far but really enjoyed its incredible reach.

I currently use a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 coupled with 1.4 and 2X tc's, though it is very heavy. Previously I used a Sigma 150-500 which I would also recommend.

Not to be a wet blanket, but 600mm on a crop camera can be daunting. Almost 1000mm, using which is an incredibly steep learning curve. I think a person could do much worse than Canon's 100-400, still looking at 640mm of reach which is totally respectable even for birding. Not the fastest lens on the planet but image stabilization makes it a good starter zoom for someone just getting into telephoto photography.

Paired with a 7D2 that 100-400 will get much "faster." 7D's ISO ratings leave something to be desired until the upgrade.

I've got the 150-600 and the 100-400 for my 7D; the Tamron is nice, and it's a nicely affordable way to get to 600 without pricing out a new car. However, for straight-up image quality in the final results, I still much prefer the 100-400.

Either way, they're both nice lenses and better ways to get out to that range without juggling TCs.

Heya,

I handhold my 150-600 Tamron a lot. I find it not to be that bad. I only use a tripod when I'm trying to land a very far away shot, or in poor lighting where it's hard to get focus so that I can manually tweak if necessary. I get fatigued faster holding my macro setup, than hand holding the 600mm on a gripped dSLR, and I'm no hulk. It's really not that bad, it's a light lens compared to other telephotos.

As for quality, the 100-400 versus 150-600 always comes up. There's always commentary for and against each one. After playing around with telephotos, I stayed with the 150-600 because frankly, getting the quality you can at 600mm, even on a lowly APS-C sensor, is simply better than 400mm on APS-C or full frame in my book. Shooting at 600mm does take a learning curve, but it's not a big one. It's mainly understanding how vastly important fast shutter speeds are, and tracking a moving target, as those two things are a new world of difference compared to 400mm and 200mm. I can track an osprey at 400mm like it's crawling. But at 600mm, it's a challenge.

Anyhow, here's some examples of the Tamron's quality at 600mm on a lowly 650D's sensor, where a 400mm simply cannot fill the frame's pixels. You be the judge. Again, this is with junk equipment even, not a nice camera, so imagine if you were pushing around with the fabled 7D2, 1D series, etc.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/mNPe​Qj

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/npRA​Zw

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/npdm​8o

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nzuq​MS

Alnitak wrote in post #17001738
Not to be a wet blanket, but 600mm on a crop camera can be daunting. Almost 1000mm, using which is an incredibly steep learning curve. I think a person could do much worse than Canon's 100-400, still looking at 640mm of reach which is totally respectable even for birding. Not the fastest lens on the planet but image stabilization makes it a good starter zoom for someone just getting into telephoto photography.

Paired with a 7D2 that 100-400 will get much "faster." 7D's ISO ratings leave something to be desired until the upgrade.

Any of the 3rd party lenses with image stabilization beats the IS on the Canon 100-400L.

I have shot the 50-500 with both a 1.4x and 2x for moon shots handheld on a 7D, and the OS is great for that, on a crop that nets me an equiv view of over 2200mm.

1.4x on the Sigma, providing 700mm

Nice shots.

man o man.... decisions decisions...

now it comes down to sigma or tamron..

i know there are threads and threads and threads on this vary question.

so my real question now is, how quickly can one be ordered and get to me here in afghan.. id love ot order fomr b+h but they dont ship to APOs.. amazon does, but maybe someone has a contact for someone over on this side of the world? china/japan/romania/ge​rmany?

Currently the Tamron in Germany at least seems to have a waiting list of about 2 months from major outlets. But according to my local Media Markt ( a large chain here) it could be 6 months with back orders. Price is about €1200 euros. I bought a Sigma 150 500 (about €750 at the minute) as I wanted a Tamron but thought I would try the Sigma out over the summer and sell /make a descicion at the end of the yearif am not happy and put the rest into an upgrade from a T3 to a 70d. I am basically pretty much a newb but at F8 and around 400 to 450mm aprox am fairly happy at the minute with the Sigma. Dont know if this helps.


Quick edit: The Sigma takes about 2 to 3 days to get sorted to be picked up from a Media Markt if your in Germany or is available from Amazon. Dunno how that works with the 3 year garantee if your moving about.

Been looking at this since Jan but I only call the local store to see if they have it in stock. Then I got tired of getting No for an answer so I broke down and preordered. Plus I got scared that the price would go up. It took 5 weeks.

Not very comparable is it? 70-200 with a 1.4x is 280mm. That vs a 600mm zoom is kind of an odd comparison.

To be honest, I think the 150-600 is a no brainer. It's as sharp (perhaps a little sharper) as the 100-400L when both are at 400m. And then you get another 50% of zoom goodness on top of it.

Heya,

400mm can't do this kind of portrait.

Did this, this morning at 600mm.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nSHs​Dv