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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 29 Jan 2015 (Thursday) 10:58
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Super Telephoto advice

 
tim1970
Senior Member
Avatar
658 posts
Gallery: 154 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 545
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 29, 2015 10:58 |  #1

I am looking for a long telephoto to enable me to get into wildlife and birding. Also help with kids outdoor sports.

I am really liking the reviews of the 100-400 II, but I also like the extra reach of the new tamron 150-600.

The Canon lens is also 2x the price.

I am just wondering if I got the 100-400, would I miss the extra reach, or would the quality and number of keepers I would get with the 100-400 would make it worth it.


Any thoughts would be appreciated.


Thanks



Gear

Flickr (external link) | Web Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Jan 29, 2015 11:24 |  #2

Both your bodies can do AF at f8. It might be worthwhile hunting down a comparison between the 100-400 with a 1.4x TC (giving you 560mm f8) and the Tamron at 600mm.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,543 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 329
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Jan 29, 2015 11:42 |  #3

hollis_f wrote in post #17405711 (external link)
Both your bodies can do AF at f8. It might be worthwhile hunting down a comparison between the 100-400 with a 1.4x TC (giving you 560mm f8) and the Tamron at 600mm.

Looks like day and night favoring the Canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=5​&APIComp=2 (external link)


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nellyle
Goldmember
Avatar
1,228 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 284
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
     
Jan 29, 2015 11:45 |  #4

Centre isn't a huge amount different, but the Canon walks it mid and corner frame!


5D3, 7D2, 1D3, 40D, 14 f2.8 Samyang, 17-40 L, 28-80 L, 70-200 2.8ii L, 200 2.8ii L, 200-400 L, 1.4 ii,
http://chris-stamp.smugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ptcanon3ti
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,286 posts
Gallery: 424 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 5963
Joined Sep 2012
Location: NJ
     
Jan 29, 2015 11:46 |  #5

I looks like the tammy is sharper in the center. After that... fuggettabottit


Paul
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/petshots/ (external link)
Body - Nikon D750
Lenses - Nikon 20 f1.8 / Nikon 16-35 f4 / Sigma 105 OS Macro / Sigma 24-105 f4 Art / Tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC / Sigma 150-600 "S"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Jan 29, 2015 12:53 |  #6

Wow! That's quite a difference.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,135 posts
Gallery: 1603 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10134
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jan 29, 2015 14:58 |  #7

tim1970 wrote in post #17405682 (external link)
I am looking for a long telephoto to enable me to get into wildlife and birding. Also help with kids outdoor sports.

I am really liking the reviews of the 100-400 II, but I also like the extra reach of the new tamron 150-600.

The Canon lens is also 2x the price.

I am just wondering if I got the 100-400, would I miss the extra reach, or would the quality and number of keepers I would get with the 100-400 would make it worth it.


Any thoughts would be appreciated.


Thanks

Heya,

Depends on what you want. You can favor maximum reach to put more pixels on target. This is good for things that are simply farther away and/or very small where you want higher pixel count advantage to keep detail. I do wildlife & birding, and to me, 400mm is the beginning of this. That's the starting point. From there you just start looking at 500mm and 600mm and dream of $12k lenses. You could look in between the Tamron and the Canon and consider the Sigma 600. Me, I went with maximum reach, and I don't regret it at all (600mm).

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,025 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2201
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jan 29, 2015 15:33 |  #8

if you get the 100-400L you'll hit spots where 400mm isn't long enough...if you get the 150-600mm you'll hit spots where 600mm isn't long enough

as for the-digital-picture crops, i think it's important to note where the crops are actually taken from...personally myself i'd say 99% of the time that crop 3 for me is going to be out of focus anyways for what i shoot...if you're shooting a lot of landscapes with the telephoto end, i could see that mattering though


IMAGE: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Other/ISO-12233-Chart-Diagram.jpg

Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jan 30, 2015 05:08 |  #9

tim1970 wrote in post #17405682 (external link)
I am looking for a long telephoto to enable me to get into wildlife and birding. Also help with kids outdoor sports.

I am really liking the reviews of the 100-400 II, but I also like the extra reach of the new tamron 150-600.

The Canon lens is also 2x the price.

I am just wondering if I got the 100-400, would I miss the extra reach, or would the quality and number of keepers I would get with the 100-400 would make it worth it.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

I agree with some of the other comments, if you're primarily shooting birds and wildlife at 600mm get the Tamron / Sigma 150-600
You already have a 70-200 2.8 II and that should get you plenty of kid's sports pics

But if you did not already have the 70-200 and were considering the lens for day time sports then the 100-400 would probably be more useful, even the older 100-400 does a good job with sports during the day

60D
100-400 (original)

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8587/16067206330_a599a97a97_b.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Perfectly ­ Frank
I'm too sexy for my lens
4,250 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Likes: 1642
Joined Oct 2010
     
Jan 30, 2015 06:19 |  #10

I had the Tamron 150-600. I was pretty satisfied with static shot IQ, even at 600mm. But I bought my Tamron for aircraft in flight, and for these panning shots I got poor results (the lens does not have a mode 2 IS panning mode, like my other Canon lenses). So I sold my Tamron on ebay. Note, in fairness to Tamron, there is a flickr member in the UK that gets great panning shots from his Tamron. My hat's off to him, but I could never duplicate his success.

I'm thinking your 7D2 would be a good match for the 100-400 II. With its 1.6x crop sensor you'd have the same field of view as a 640mm lens on your 5D3.

Here's a guy who gets excellent results with his 7D2 & 100-400 II combo. Even with the 1.4x attached the IQ looks pretty good. Although I don't know how the extender would work for BIF or action scenes.

http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/13364​87/0 (external link)


When you see my camera gear you'll think I'm a pro.
When you see my photos you'll know that I'm not.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RikWriter
Goldmember
Avatar
3,937 posts
Gallery: 81 photos
Likes: 805
Joined May 2004
Location: Lakeland, FL
     
Jan 30, 2015 07:50 |  #11

I have the Tamron and use it with my 7D and I've really liked it so far.
I know the Canon has got rave reviews, but I am not going to lay out that much money and I don't like buying a lens that I know I'll be using a TC with most of the time. Been there, done that, won't do it again.


My pics:
www.pbase.com/rikwrite​r (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Jan 30, 2015 08:58 |  #12

I was just looking at this same comparison a couple of weeks ago. I ruled out the 100-400mk2 because of cost. However, I was comparing the Tamron with the 100-400mk1, which can be found for pretty good prices right now as dealers are trying to clear them out (especially if you combine that with the rebate expiring tomorrow). From reading reviews and countless forums, here's what I gathered:

Image Quality: A toss-up depending on focal range. At some focal lengths, the Tamron is sharper, at others the Canon excels. The 100-400 with my 1.4x teleconverter gets me out to 560mm too (at similar image quality as the Tamron at 600mm), but will only auto focus on the 1D series, 5D3, and 7D2.

IS: Tamron probably a little better.

Focus speed: Canon probably a little better.

Reliability: Tamron has a much better warranty, but the Canon is pretty much guaranteed to work with every EF camera during its lifetime. Read some reports of Tamron's AF not working on some modern camera bodies, even with the new firmware, so I wasn't sure what to make of that.

Ergonomics: Canon is much smaller and lighter to carry around… Tamron wouldn't require me to swap off the teleconverter if I wanted just a little more zoom. I've tried the push/pull 100-400, and don't mind it at all.

I ended up pulling the trigger on a 100-400mk1 and love it so far.


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RikWriter
Goldmember
Avatar
3,937 posts
Gallery: 81 photos
Likes: 805
Joined May 2004
Location: Lakeland, FL
Post edited over 4 years ago by RikWriter.
     
Jan 30, 2015 11:16 |  #13

Mike, having used the 100-400 MKI with a TC, I would highly disagree that the IQ is better than the Tamron at 600. And even with a camera that will AF with the TC on, the AF is much slower and less accurate. I sold my 100-400 MKI to buy the Tamron and don't regret it at all.


My pics:
www.pbase.com/rikwrite​r (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ptcanon3ti
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,286 posts
Gallery: 424 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 5963
Joined Sep 2012
Location: NJ
Post edited over 4 years ago by ptcanon3ti.
     
Jan 30, 2015 11:18 |  #14

What would you all prefer: the Sigma/Tamron 150-600 lenses. Or the Sigma 120-300 2.8 wuth a 2x TC?


Paul
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/petshots/ (external link)
Body - Nikon D750
Lenses - Nikon 20 f1.8 / Nikon 16-35 f4 / Sigma 105 OS Macro / Sigma 24-105 f4 Art / Tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC / Sigma 150-600 "S"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RikWriter
Goldmember
Avatar
3,937 posts
Gallery: 81 photos
Likes: 805
Joined May 2004
Location: Lakeland, FL
     
Jan 30, 2015 11:30 |  #15

ptcanon3ti wrote in post #17407230 (external link)
What would you all prefer: the Sigma/Tamron 150-600 lenses. Or the Sigma 120-300 2.8 wuth a 2x TC?


I had the 120-300 and tried using it with a 2X TC. AF was very slow and inaccurate with the 2X on it. It was pretty fast with the 1.4, but then it's a pretty big and heavy lens for a 420mm.
Haven't used the Sigma 150-600, so I can't help you there.


My pics:
www.pbase.com/rikwrite​r (external link)

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

5,228 views & 0 likes for this thread
Super Telephoto advice
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 OverTheHill
684 guests, 271 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.