May 22, 2018, 02:00:02 PM

Author Topic: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]  (Read 9875 times)

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3414
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #30 on: April 12, 2018, 11:28:30 AM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

This is actually not true.  I own both the 100-400LII and the Sigma 150-600, and although I the 100-400LII is my preference 95%+ of the time, that is because it's much smaller and easier to get good a handheld shot with, it has superior (more consistent and faster) autofocus, it has mode 3 IS, and it has a vastly superior MF ring.

Plus, in virtually all cases cases, getting close enough to take a 400mm photo will yield a sueprior photo to a 600mm photo.

However, you can't always get closer, and on two tripod shots, if a bird is perfectly framed and focused at 600mm, losing 1/3 of the optical resolution will make it an inferior photo.  Likewise, at 560mm f/8, the Canon will only take superior photos to the Sigma at f/6.3 if there's a lot of light.  If it's a question between ISO 320 and ISO 640, the Sigma shot will be better after post every time (assuming perfect focus).

The big difference is that for me the Sigma takes perfect photos on a tripod, while the 400 is great either handheld or with a monopod.  More often than not, I'm out looking for interesting bird shots, not looking to shoot a one specific bird shot, and a handheld/monopod lens yields more opportunities.  But if I know what I'm shooting and I need the reach (for instance, there's a body of water separating me and the subject), the Sigma is a great deal -- especially given the price.

For the Nikon 200-500, I think it's actually a bit disappointing at 500; unlike the Sigma (mine is razor sharp at 600), the Nikon seems a little soft, at least on the copy I was playing with.
A minor correction: Sigma is not 5.6 at 600mm it is 6.3 so there is not going to be a difference between iso 320 and iso 640. More like iso 400 and 640 (2/3rds of a stop). No that a big deal.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #30 on: April 12, 2018, 11:28:30 AM »

Talys

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1521
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #31 on: April 12, 2018, 01:30:19 PM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

This is actually not true.  I own both the 100-400LII and the Sigma 150-600, and although I the 100-400LII is my preference 95%+ of the time, that is because it's much smaller and easier to get good a handheld shot with, it has superior (more consistent and faster) autofocus, it has mode 3 IS, and it has a vastly superior MF ring.

Plus, in virtually all cases cases, getting close enough to take a 400mm photo will yield a sueprior photo to a 600mm photo.

However, you can't always get closer, and on two tripod shots, if a bird is perfectly framed and focused at 600mm, losing 1/3 of the optical resolution will make it an inferior photo.  Likewise, at 560mm f/8, the Canon will only take superior photos to the Sigma at f/6.3 if there's a lot of light.  If it's a question between ISO 320 and ISO 640, the Sigma shot will be better after post every time (assuming perfect focus).

The big difference is that for me the Sigma takes perfect photos on a tripod, while the 400 is great either handheld or with a monopod.  More often than not, I'm out looking for interesting bird shots, not looking to shoot a one specific bird shot, and a handheld/monopod lens yields more opportunities.  But if I know what I'm shooting and I need the reach (for instance, there's a body of water separating me and the subject), the Sigma is a great deal -- especially given the price.

For the Nikon 200-500, I think it's actually a bit disappointing at 500; unlike the Sigma (mine is razor sharp at 600), the Nikon seems a little soft, at least on the copy I was playing with.
A minor correction: Sigma is not 5.6 at 600mm it is 6.3 so there is not going to be a difference between iso 320 and iso 640. More like iso 400 and 640 (2/3rds of a stop). No that a big deal.

I actually mentioned f/6.3 on the Sigma :D

What happens for me on the 6DII is that I get better results out of slightly underexposed photos that are under ISO 400 than properly exposed photos at ISO 400+, so at f/5.6, if it's borderline, I will tend to set ISO to 320, underexpose by a third or half stop, and bump it up in post.  The end result looks close to base ISO.  But if I'm going to be at 640+, there's no point.  I might as well just use auto ISO, and let the camera pick 640, 800, 1000, whatever.

You are right, though: there is little difference between 5.6 and 6.3, though there is a huge difference in autofocus speed between the Sigma at 600mm and the Canon at 400mm (not all of it due to the 1/3 stop, of course).

What is a really big difference in usability, because of how much light I usually get, even on a bright sunny day, is the difference between f/5.6 and f/8 on a 400LII at f/5.6 + 1.4TC.

H. Jones

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 204
  • Photojournalist
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #32 on: April 12, 2018, 11:14:22 PM »
A 400mm f/2.8 1.4X would definitely be an awesome lens. I'm still on the fence about the 200-400 f/4-- for that kind of money, F/4 just doesn't cut it in certain circumstances, and for the kind of money for a 400mm f/2.8, I'd much rather be able to immediately extend it to a 560mm f/4 for daylight uses. Would be able to wear many hats and thus, even if it's a bit more expensive, might make more financial sense than the current options. It's practically a 400 f/2.8 and 600 f/4 all in one.
Bodies: 1DX mark II, 5d Mark III
Lenses: 16-35mm F/4L IS |  24-70mm F/2.8L II | 70-200mm F/2.8L IS II | 100-400mm F/4.5-5.6L IS II  | 50mm 1.8 STM

hkenneth

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 26
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #33 on: April 25, 2018, 11:27:40 PM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

I don't have the 100-400 II but my Tamron 150-600 G2 at 500mm f8 is sharper than 100-400 I. Could be sample variation though.

Tanrom G2 at 400mm https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/39808737550/in/datetaken/
Tanrom G2 at 500mm+ https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41591501121/in/datetaken/
6D | 16-35 f/4L IS | 28 f/2.8 | 35 f/2 | 50 f/1.8 STM | 100 f/2.8 Macro | Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 | 150-600 f/5-6.3 G2

Michael Clark

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
  • Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #34 on: April 27, 2018, 02:08:52 AM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

I don't have the 100-400 II but my Tamron 150-600 G2 at 500mm f8 is sharper than 100-400 I. Could be sample variation though.

Tanrom G2 at 400mm https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/39808737550/in/datetaken/
Tanrom G2 at 500mm+ https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41591501121/in/datetaken/

The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II is considerably sharper at 400mm than the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS everywhere except in the exact center of the frame (where they are equal). Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

It's also a bit better than the Tamron 150-600 G2 at 400mm. Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

But the Tamorn drops way off by 600mm, especially in the center of the frame. Whether wide open or stopped down to f/8.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F5-63-Di-VC-USD-G2-Model-A022-Canon__598_1009_1469_1009_1751_0
It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive. - C. W. Leadbeater

5D3 7D2 5D2 EF70-200/2.8 II EF24-70/2.8 EF 135/2 EF50/1.4 EF100/2 EF24-105/4 EF17-40/4

Michael Clark

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
  • Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #35 on: April 27, 2018, 02:17:13 AM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

This is actually not true.  I own both the 100-400LII and the Sigma 150-600, and although I the 100-400LII is my preference 95%+ of the time, that is because it's much smaller and easier to get good a handheld shot with, it has superior (more consistent and faster) autofocus, it has mode 3 IS, and it has a vastly superior MF ring.

Plus, in virtually all cases cases, getting close enough to take a 400mm photo will yield a sueprior photo to a 600mm photo.

However, you can't always get closer, and on two tripod shots, if a bird is perfectly framed and focused at 600mm, losing 1/3 of the optical resolution will make it an inferior photo.  Likewise, at 560mm f/8, the Canon will only take superior photos to the Sigma at f/6.3 if there's a lot of light.  If it's a question between ISO 320 and ISO 640, the Sigma shot will be better after post every time (assuming perfect focus).

The big difference is that for me the Sigma takes perfect photos on a tripod, while the 400 is great either handheld or with a monopod.  More often than not, I'm out looking for interesting bird shots, not looking to shoot a one specific bird shot, and a handheld/monopod lens yields more opportunities.  But if I know what I'm shooting and I need the reach (for instance, there's a body of water separating me and the subject), the Sigma is a great deal -- especially given the price.

For the Nikon 200-500, I think it's actually a bit disappointing at 500; unlike the Sigma (mine is razor sharp at 600), the Nikon seems a little soft, at least on the copy I was playing with.
A minor correction: Sigma is not 5.6 at 600mm it is 6.3 so there is not going to be a difference between iso 320 and iso 640. More like iso 400 and 640 (2/3rds of a stop). No that a big deal.

Only if the sensor resolution, rather than the lens' resolution, is the limiting factor.

If you have a lens that can resolve 1,000 lp/ih and a camera with 2,000 pixels over the height of that image you can crop it to 67% (the center 1,333 pixels) and it will still be sharper than an uncropped image from the same camera taken with a lens that can resolve less than 667 lp/ih.

Re: about using the 100-400 with a 1.4X. I didn't say anything about using an extender. I said "crop the snot out of it."
« Last Edit: April 27, 2018, 02:21:10 AM by Michael Clark »
It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive. - C. W. Leadbeater

5D3 7D2 5D2 EF70-200/2.8 II EF24-70/2.8 EF 135/2 EF50/1.4 EF100/2 EF24-105/4 EF17-40/4

hkenneth

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 26
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #36 on: April 27, 2018, 10:20:15 AM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

I don't have the 100-400 II but my Tamron 150-600 G2 at 500mm f8 is sharper than 100-400 I. Could be sample variation though.

Tanrom G2 at 400mm https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/39808737550/in/datetaken/
Tanrom G2 at 500mm+ https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41591501121/in/datetaken/

The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II is considerably sharper at 400mm than the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS everywhere except in the exact center of the frame (where they are equal). Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

It's also a bit better than the Tamron 150-600 G2 at 400mm. Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

But the Tamorn drops way off by 600mm, especially in the center of the frame. Whether wide open or stopped down to f/8.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F5-63-Di-VC-USD-G2-Model-A022-Canon__598_1009_1469_1009_1751_0

Yes, the Tamron sharpness drops at 600mm. If you just treat it as a 150-550mm lens you would be happier. But I can understand the motivation for Tamron to push it to 600mm as it sure sounds better in terms of marketing goes.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2018, 10:23:55 AM by hkenneth »
6D | 16-35 f/4L IS | 28 f/2.8 | 35 f/2 | 50 f/1.8 STM | 100 f/2.8 Macro | Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 | 150-600 f/5-6.3 G2

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #36 on: April 27, 2018, 10:20:15 AM »

stevelee

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 495
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #37 on: April 27, 2018, 04:28:39 PM »
My 100-400 II came yesterday, and I posted a few 100% crops from the handheld test shots I did:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23603.msg718760;topicseen#msg718760

hkenneth

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 26
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #38 on: April 29, 2018, 12:06:09 AM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

I don't have the 100-400 II but my Tamron 150-600 G2 at 500mm f8 is sharper than 100-400 I. Could be sample variation though.

Tanrom G2 at 400mm https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/39808737550/in/datetaken/
Tanrom G2 at 500mm+ https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41591501121/in/datetaken/

The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II is considerably sharper at 400mm than the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS everywhere except in the exact center of the frame (where they are equal). Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

It's also a bit better than the Tamron 150-600 G2 at 400mm. Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

But the Tamorn drops way off by 600mm, especially in the center of the frame. Whether wide open or stopped down to f/8.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F5-63-Di-VC-USD-G2-Model-A022-Canon__598_1009_1469_1009_1751_0

Given the right condition, Tamron G2 can also be sharp at 600mm: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41728206442/in/datetaken/
« Last Edit: April 29, 2018, 01:34:09 AM by hkenneth »
6D | 16-35 f/4L IS | 28 f/2.8 | 35 f/2 | 50 f/1.8 STM | 100 f/2.8 Macro | Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 | 150-600 f/5-6.3 G2

tron

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3414
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #39 on: April 29, 2018, 01:07:24 PM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

I don't have the 100-400 II but my Tamron 150-600 G2 at 500mm f8 is sharper than 100-400 I. Could be sample variation though.

Tanrom G2 at 400mm https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/39808737550/in/datetaken/
Tanrom G2 at 500mm+ https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41591501121/in/datetaken/

The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II is considerably sharper at 400mm than the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS everywhere except in the exact center of the frame (where they are equal). Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

It's also a bit better than the Tamron 150-600 G2 at 400mm. Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

But the Tamorn drops way off by 600mm, especially in the center of the frame. Whether wide open or stopped down to f/8.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F5-63-Di-VC-USD-G2-Model-A022-Canon__598_1009_1469_1009_1751_0

Given the right condition, Tamron G2 can also be sharp at 600mm: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41728206442/in/datetaken/
Using a 20MP Full frame at F/16 is rather extreme way to make the Tamron look sharp! But yes that is a nice and sharp picture.

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6774
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #40 on: April 29, 2018, 01:45:03 PM »
I'm tired of waiting for Canon. I'm going into partnership with Harry and we are going to do this ourselves.

It will be a SUPER TELEPHOTO LENS THAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN ASKING FOR. 16-800 mm f2.8 with two tele-extenders, a 1.5x and a 2.3x. AND THERE WILL BE NO LOSS OF LIGHT so you can use the f2.8 aperture with either extenders. It will BE USABLE ON ALL CANON CAMERAS, INCLUDING THE M SERIES AND ANY NEW MIRRORLESS FULL FRAME MODELS AS WELL.

By using special LIGHT-FIELD OPTICAL DISPERSION TECHNOLOGY the lens will weigh less than 2 lbs and be no more than seven inches long.Thanks to the light-field technology THERE WILL BE NO NEED FOR FOCUSING BECAUSE ALL FOCUSING CAN BE DONE IN POST PRODUCTION. NO MORE OUT OF FOCUS PICTURES!!!!

I am an ABSOLUTE EXPERT IN LIGHT AND PHYSICS so believe me I CAN DO THIS. However, I will be designing it using public domain software ON MY SPECIAL HAL 9505 (The newest version of the HAL Series) so that CANON CANNOT GO TO COURT TO STOP ME. I have years of experience with LAWSUITS AND HAVE WON EVERY ONE OF THEM, SO I HOPE CANON TRIES TO SUE ME.

Stay tuned for Progress Reports.
Sounds like you are on the hairy (Harry?) edge of new technology! Are you going to make a filter for the end of the lens that can be put on all other lenses, and will turn them into F1.4 lenses with MTF curves greater than 100% ?

P.S. Your caps lock is sticking....
« Last Edit: April 29, 2018, 01:52:47 PM by Don Haines »
The best camera is the one in your hands

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6774
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #41 on: April 29, 2018, 01:48:25 PM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

I don't have the 100-400 II but my Tamron 150-600 G2 at 500mm f8 is sharper than 100-400 I. Could be sample variation though.

Tanrom G2 at 400mm https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/39808737550/in/datetaken/
Tanrom G2 at 500mm+ https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41591501121/in/datetaken/

The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II is considerably sharper at 400mm than the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS everywhere except in the exact center of the frame (where they are equal). Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

It's also a bit better than the Tamron 150-600 G2 at 400mm. Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

But the Tamorn drops way off by 600mm, especially in the center of the frame. Whether wide open or stopped down to f/8.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F5-63-Di-VC-USD-G2-Model-A022-Canon__598_1009_1469_1009_1751_0

Yes, the Tamron sharpness drops at 600mm. If you just treat it as a 150-550mm lens you would be happier. But I can understand the motivation for Tamron to push it to 600mm as it sure sounds better in terms of marketing goes.
I was surprised that they didn't make at a 200-600.... it it was 3X zoom instead of 4X zoom, they could have made it a bit sharper with the same materials.....
The best camera is the one in your hands

hkenneth

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 26
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #42 on: April 30, 2018, 01:33:16 AM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

I don't have the 100-400 II but my Tamron 150-600 G2 at 500mm f8 is sharper than 100-400 I. Could be sample variation though.

Tanrom G2 at 400mm https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/39808737550/in/datetaken/
Tanrom G2 at 500mm+ https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41591501121/in/datetaken/

The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II is considerably sharper at 400mm than the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS everywhere except in the exact center of the frame (where they are equal). Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

It's also a bit better than the Tamron 150-600 G2 at 400mm. Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

But the Tamorn drops way off by 600mm, especially in the center of the frame. Whether wide open or stopped down to f/8.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F5-63-Di-VC-USD-G2-Model-A022-Canon__598_1009_1469_1009_1751_0

Yes, the Tamron sharpness drops at 600mm. If you just treat it as a 150-550mm lens you would be happier. But I can understand the motivation for Tamron to push it to 600mm as it sure sounds better in terms of marketing goes.
I was surprised that they didn't make at a 200-600.... it it was 3X zoom instead of 4X zoom, they could have made it a bit sharper with the same materials.....

I don't know. I agree with you. Very few people would buy this lens because it covers 150-200mm. I do appreciate Tamron for making this lens though. Not long ago, such a lens was unimaginable.
6D | 16-35 f/4L IS | 28 f/2.8 | 35 f/2 | 50 f/1.8 STM | 100 f/2.8 Macro | Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 | 150-600 f/5-6.3 G2

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #42 on: April 30, 2018, 01:33:16 AM »

hkenneth

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 26
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #43 on: May 02, 2018, 09:16:04 PM »
Any mention of Super tele zoom to compete with 150-600mm or 200-500mm lenses currently present on market?

It's the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II.

Used properly you can crop the snot out of it and still get better IQ than the Sigma C/Sigma S/Tamron 150-600mm offerings.

I don't have the 100-400 II but my Tamron 150-600 G2 at 500mm f8 is sharper than 100-400 I. Could be sample variation though.

Tanrom G2 at 400mm https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/39808737550/in/datetaken/
Tanrom G2 at 500mm+ https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41591501121/in/datetaken/

The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS II is considerably sharper at 400mm than the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS everywhere except in the exact center of the frame (where they are equal). Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

It's also a bit better than the Tamron 150-600 G2 at 400mm. Wide open or stopped down to f/8.

But the Tamorn drops way off by 600mm, especially in the center of the frame. Whether wide open or stopped down to f/8.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EF-100-400mm-F45-56L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F5-63-Di-VC-USD-G2-Model-A022-Canon__598_1009_1469_1009_1751_0

Given the right condition, Tamron G2 can also be sharp at 600mm: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/41728206442/in/datetaken/
Using a 20MP Full frame at F/16 is rather extreme way to make the Tamron look sharp! But yes that is a nice and sharp picture.

You don't have to go f16 to get a sharp image at 600mm. I must have accidentally touched the aperture wheel. Here is an f8 image at 600mm, handhold at 1/200s believe it or not: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143732728@N06/40959158475/in/datetaken/
6D | 16-35 f/4L IS | 28 f/2.8 | 35 f/2 | 50 f/1.8 STM | 100 f/2.8 Macro | Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 | 150-600 f/5-6.3 G2

applecider

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 386
Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #44 on: May 03, 2018, 03:09:14 AM »
The idea of adding the hardware for extension to the f 2.8 or 4  superteles seems contrary to the physical reality of actually using the lenses from a weight perspective. 

Personally I can control handheld a EF ii 500 mm with a 1.4 extender, the  unextended 400 ii f2.8 and the 600 ii f4 are fatiguing and have a bit too much inertia for big, IMHE.   I’ve not used the 200-400 f4, but it is spec ed on the heavy side. 

 Earlier in the thread some one mentioned the concept of drop in extenders, or perhaps an extender module, now that sounds interesting with the caveat that space for extenders are going to throw the weight forward, where it doesn’t manage well.
AE-1, T90,EOS Elan 7e, EOS-M, 7D, 5D3, 1dx, ef40 2.8

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Here are Some Interesting Lens Mentions We've Received [CR1]
« Reply #44 on: May 03, 2018, 03:09:14 AM »