Kickflipkid687 Goldmember 1,074 posts Likes: 151 Joined Jan 2014 More info | Nov 14, 2014 15:52 | #451 I feel the tamron is pretty flat compared to the Canon lenses. Not sure about the Sigma. My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com/photos/86957042@N07/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BeerBelly Hatchling 6 posts Joined Nov 2014 More info | Nov 15, 2014 01:20 | #452 I think you're right in saying that 600mm takes time to learn and that a lot of the samples might be user error. But I'm still not sure from the samples that are great (like that german review I posted), if the Sigma is worth the price difference to the Tamron...btw...what do you think about this review?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
dufflover Senior Member  315 posts Joined Nov 2012 Location: Australia More info | Nov 15, 2014 03:26 | #453 Even with the lens heading out now I still agree with others here - it still seems so variable in quality and even more confusing when some of the settings leave room for error, like the Lenstip ones for instance. "Duffman, could you bring in two bottles of smooth, untainted DUFF?""Oh Yeah!"
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Kickflipkid687 Goldmember 1,074 posts Likes: 151 Joined Jan 2014 More info | Nov 15, 2014 09:38 | #454 BeerBelly wrote in post #17272921  I think you're right in saying that 600mm takes time to learn and that a lot of the samples might be user error. But I'm still not sure from the samples that are great (like that german review I posted), if the Sigma is worth the price difference to the Tamron...btw...what do you think about this review? http://digitalcamerapolska.pl …dg-os-hsm-zdjecia-testowe Just found another link on Dpreview comparing the Tammy and the Sigma...samples included: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3753096 Those look nice. But I wish I could see them larger in size. My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com/photos/86957042@N07/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BeerBelly Hatchling 6 posts Joined Nov 2014 More info | The polish review has links under the photos to full size samples...just a link to one of them:
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BeerBelly Hatchling 6 posts Joined Nov 2014 More info | A swedish test as well
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Kickflipkid687 Goldmember 1,074 posts Likes: 151 Joined Jan 2014 More info | Nov 15, 2014 15:16 | #457 I think this lens would get heavy quick, if you are shooting handheld. Sigma 150-600 Vs. Tamron 150-600 Same focal length for (almost) the same brightness, but also takes most of the similarities end. Sigma's version is not only expensive, it also visibly better image quality throughout the zoom range, and most noticeable difference from 500mm and upwards where Tamron lose more sharpness. Sigman, however, is larger and heavier, but at the same time feels more professional and thorough. It also noticeably less chromatic aberration and slightly less distortion, and a little better results when incident sunlight. Other differences are that the Tamron lacks focus limitation and pan for stabilization Manifold Tamron is that it vinjetterar less and gives maximum aperture of f / 5.6 at 400mm while the Sigma gives f / 6th I also got the feeling that Sigma's image stabilization was not quite as effective as the Tamron, but it can also have and do with that Sigman is larger and heavier, which makes it all the more difficult to keep still. Tamronen I could hand hold at 1 / 60s at the longest focal length, while Sigman I was forced to choose about 1 step faster shutter speed to not get camera shake, advantage Tamron therefore, if you will use the lens handheld. In addition, the price difference is so big (today 10990kr vs. 16490kr) that both are Top class based on its price. My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com/photos/86957042@N07/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Kickflipkid687 Goldmember 1,074 posts Likes: 151 Joined Jan 2014 More info | Nov 15, 2014 15:20 | #458 Some of the softness could also be from the AA filter on the canon sensors vs. not having one on some of the Nikon cameras? The Canon shots still look pretty sharp. Or would sharpen up fine I think. My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com/photos/86957042@N07/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Immaculens creeped by the TF....  More info | cruizing the net for vid reviews.... maybe you saw this one
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 15, 2014 16:04 | #460 Here's another one: Gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeetsukumaran/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
I'll put this out there, I shot the Sigma 150-600 Sport for a couple days now and it went back today (Samy's Camera). The build quality is excellent and AF is quicker than my Tamron 150-600. From 150 to 400 IQ is very good but at 600mm where I will be using it, was equal or a little softer compared to the Tamron. 
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 15, 2014 16:48 | #462 peteg1 wrote in post #17273869 I'll put this out there, I shot the Sigma 150-600 Sport for a couple days now and it went back today (Samy's Camera). The build quality is excellent and AF is quicker than my Tamron 150-600. From 150 to 400 IQ is very good but at 600mm where I will be using it, was equal or a little softer compared to the Tamron. I did not put a bunch of test samples together to post, I did my own test (tripod) with 7DII, 5DIII and used my Sony a7r using manual (focus peaking) to element any AF errors and like I said the Sigma was equal or just a little softer at 600mm (my copy). But if I never had the Tamron I would have thought 600mm on the Sigma was fine. Don't know if there is copy variances or not, because some samples on the net looked very good at 600mm to me. Also handholding both lenses (no problem with weight, but Tamron is lighter) the VC on the Tamron was just better. I ordered the Sigma after seeing some very good samples at 600mm (Nikon). I don't what no one to think I disliked the Sigma. It's a fine lens. Very useful to know. Thanks for sharing. What are your opinions regarding color rendition, compared not just to Tamron, but maybe, e.g. the 70-200L f2.8 mkII or 100-400L IS? As I noted earlier, even the sharp Sigma samples seem to have somewhat tepid colors, and I cannot tell if it is me, the conditions under which the image was taken, or some property of the lens (like coatings). Gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeetsukumaran/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Kickflipkid687 Goldmember 1,074 posts Likes: 151 Joined Jan 2014 More info | Nov 15, 2014 17:02 | #463 Damn, thanks for sharing. Could possibly copy variation, but who knows. I like the sound of faster AF, but that's not worth 2x the price. My Flickr page - https://www.flickr.com/photos/86957042@N07/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 15, 2014 17:33 | #464 Kickflipkid687 wrote in post #17273900 Damn, thanks for sharing. Could possibly copy variation, but who knows. I like the sound of faster AF, but that's not worth 2x the price. That's how I looked at it. If there was no Tamron 150-600, I would have kept the Sigma and been very happy.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 15, 2014 17:51 | #465 jeetsukumaran wrote in post #17273875 Very useful to know. Thanks for sharing. What are your opinions regarding color rendition, compared not just to Tamron, but maybe, e.g. the 70-200L f2.8 mkII or 100-400L IS? As I noted earlier, even the sharp Sigma samples seem to have somewhat tepid colors, and I cannot tell if it is me, the conditions under which the image was taken, or some property of the lens (like coatings). To me I've always liked Canon. It was close between Sigma and Tamron, but love the way my Sigma primes look. To me at 600mm neither one are the greatest at revealing colors of various objects.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is IoDaLi Photography 1659 guests, 131 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
