candc said:
Ya if you have the 120-300 2.8 that makes things tricky. I think that lens (+ext) vs. this Tamron is the big question for those looking to get into the super-tele range on a budget.
Upvote
0
Tamron 150-600 Shootout via LensRentals.com
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Ya if you have the 120-300 2.8 that makes things tricky. I think that lens (+ext) vs. this Tamron is the big question for those looking to get into the super-tele range on a budget.
CarlMillerPhoto said:
When the new lens comes I will do a comparison and post for anyone that is interested.
Upvote
0
Albi86 said:
Roger did measure the 150-600 @ 500mm. The drop off in MTF wide open is very minimal compared to 600mm. I wonder if cropping @ 500mm would give better results than 600mm when wide open, especially when used on a crop body.
Upvote
0
hoodlum said:Albi86 said:
Roger did measure the 150-600 @ 500mm. The drop off in MTF wide open is very minimal compared to 600mm. I wonder if cropping @ 500mm would give better results than 600mm when wide open, especially when used on a crop body.
Looking at this chart of Roger's, it seems that 500mm is ok...the drop off hasn't hit rock bottom yet. Is that a correct conclusion?
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
+1
200-500 would be perfect!
Mine ships on Monday, and should be here by Wednesday! I've been very happy with my 75-300L, but more reach is needed and I'm not going to reward Canon for complacency. How many years have there been rumors about a 100-400 replacement?
I look at the Tamron as a lens to get by with until this phantom mkII 100-400 arrives when were all 150 years old!
Will have four days off to test it out on the 5dmkiii and 70d ;D
Upvote
0
Yes, but instead of a $12,000 fast lens, something slower and around $2000 would fill a nice hole in the lineup....wsmith96 said:
Upvote
0
Its a nice zoom range, but the problem with stopping down to f/11 at 600mm is that you will be at really high ISO when shooting in lower light to get a respectable shutter speed. In this case it will likely be better to shoot with a 400mm at f5.6 and crop in post. (Which arguably, this lens will allow you to do....)
AF performance may be a big deciding factor. It this lens can perform it may make up for IQ deficiencies. It's definitely an interesting lens.
AF performance may be a big deciding factor. It this lens can perform it may make up for IQ deficiencies. It's definitely an interesting lens.
Upvote
0
That sounds good ... looks like I'm gonna be selling my Sigma 150-500 OS and get this new Tammy within the next 30 days. Will request my ex-boss who is coming from Japan next month to get it for me.Canon Rumors said:
Upvote
0
I'd like to add 2 points:
A:
We'll know much more in a month, but it does seem that technically, the lens does:
0- about all the 100-400 does with unnoticeably different IQ
1- doesn't require knowing how to play the trombone, which I never got the hang of in almost a year of 100-400 use
2- costs 35 percent less
3- goes out 100mm further without bad IQ loss
4- goes out another 100mm with what could be unacceptable IQ loss in most situations (this is the thing we need tested; such as comparisons to 100-400+TC or cropping. I can tell you a 1.4 TC made my 100-400 unfun. I'd like to see the Tamron at 560mm versus the 100-400 with 1.4 TC)
5- Has 5x the warrantee period
6- Satisfies the little voice in even the Canon partisan's head that says, "Yeah, this'll show Canon it can't take us for granted."
This is speaking as a 100-400 owner until 12 hours ago, when a woman from Portland, OR bought mine on eBay for 120 percent the cost of the new Tamron I just ordered from B&H. But the other point...
B:
Canon may or may not be intending to re-do the 100-400 with a Mark II. But if precedent holds, that $1700 lens would be a $2499 lens at least in 2014... UNTIL Tamron punched them in the price stratification gut. IF there was an imminent lens launch coming from Canon, I think there's a guy at Canon USA who is crapping ceramics right now. And his boss's boss is wondering what the heck else Tamron is going to launch, ruining another high-margin market for them.
This new lens is nice for those of us hoping to reach out and get a few wildlife shots we'd been missing, but it spells good old free market price inflection point competition for everyone else.
OK, bonus point:
C:
The camera market has been throttled in the past couple of years with cell phone makers finally putting decent little cameras that meet 90 percent of everyman's needs. If you are a corporate strategist at any of the camera/lens companies in Japan, you react to this by pushing lenses. More lenses, different lenses, better lenses. You go and sell those lenses to people and you get higher margins than the undependable camera market gets. This is not a long-term strategy in terms of industrial capacity allocation, but it's a prudent one for a couple years if you can't predict what's going to happen in 18 months. Concurrent with this is a lowering of the camera body price points, as you want to get as many people as possible into your platform so you can, yes, sell more lenses.
If what I formulated above is true, and the Canon folks are seeing it too, then you would see this future in 2014:
- A low-end camera would be launched with much of the functionality of the Rebel/70D (at least the video bits) to capture marketshare for future lens sales. This camera would be small, appealing to those who would otherwise forego an SLR for a phone.
- It would be bundled with a pancake lens to make it feel like a P&S form factor. There's probably some Canon USA product manager who is still steaming because he wanted to introduce same 10 months ago, but the others feared he'd cannibalize their sales, trying to convince themselves that the market would turn around. (And now that he's been established as correct, they'll give this project to one of the minds that didn't have that vision because the company culture rewards respect of seniority). I'm guessing this camera is the one coming in February.
- The P&S is pretty much dying, but Canon will just consolidate the numerous offerings, doing less price stratification and doing more loading up of features (the ones not adding incremental production costs) into the low end.
- The arbitrary use of APS-C sensors as a market splitter between enthusiasts and pros, maintained largely through the discrimination in software/processor versions, will make even less sense now. Pros need crop sensors. Some enthusiasts would move to Canon for a full frame sensor. The entire hierarchy of camera features and names versus sensors will change.
- The naming convention will employ three dimensions of variables: level of "pro-ness"; crop factor; and special feature (like we see sometimes with the appending character on a 1D body).
- Unfortunately, we will see more regional differences, as Canon Japan attempts to exploit market differences by giving the indigenous executives more product and pricing power. Their hope will be that they can maximize margins by taking advantage of instances where, for instance, there remain pockets of high-margin P&S sales. This will largely take the form of certain products not being available in certain markets - those local executives fearing the destruction of a still-alive existing market. To end users, it will seem nonsensical, and there will be many complaints on the forums.
- Canon will launch education and marketing efforts attempting to push a specific class of knowledge: those things you can do exclusively with slr lenses. You will see emphasis on subject isolation; super telephoto tips; focus capabilities unique to larger sensors; etc. They will de-emphasize issues that are common to iPhones and Rebels both.
- A Canon lens competitor will attempt to launch an Android SLR, and it will test disastrously. They may launch it anyways. A variant of this may come to pass: one of the desperate Android tablet producers may purchase one of the lens companies. This would have already happened had the lens manufacturers not been based in Japan, where such things are quite difficult.
- Canon will fall to the temptation to make its body-to-lens interface deliberately more opaque to third party lens makers. AF will be slower on non-brand lenses and there may even be a body introduced that isn't compatible with some key existing third party lenses. Canon will explore selling to third parties access to the API, but this will run into serious antitrust interest on the part of the US Department of Justice. 9 months later the Europeans would jump on that bandwagon too.
All this from reading the entrails of a single Tamron lens launch. You heard it here first. -Tig
And you go around to the rumor sites and you tell them that 2014 is the upcoming "year of the lens." Heard it here first.
A:
We'll know much more in a month, but it does seem that technically, the lens does:
0- about all the 100-400 does with unnoticeably different IQ
1- doesn't require knowing how to play the trombone, which I never got the hang of in almost a year of 100-400 use
2- costs 35 percent less
3- goes out 100mm further without bad IQ loss
4- goes out another 100mm with what could be unacceptable IQ loss in most situations (this is the thing we need tested; such as comparisons to 100-400+TC or cropping. I can tell you a 1.4 TC made my 100-400 unfun. I'd like to see the Tamron at 560mm versus the 100-400 with 1.4 TC)
5- Has 5x the warrantee period
6- Satisfies the little voice in even the Canon partisan's head that says, "Yeah, this'll show Canon it can't take us for granted."
This is speaking as a 100-400 owner until 12 hours ago, when a woman from Portland, OR bought mine on eBay for 120 percent the cost of the new Tamron I just ordered from B&H. But the other point...
B:
Canon may or may not be intending to re-do the 100-400 with a Mark II. But if precedent holds, that $1700 lens would be a $2499 lens at least in 2014... UNTIL Tamron punched them in the price stratification gut. IF there was an imminent lens launch coming from Canon, I think there's a guy at Canon USA who is crapping ceramics right now. And his boss's boss is wondering what the heck else Tamron is going to launch, ruining another high-margin market for them.
This new lens is nice for those of us hoping to reach out and get a few wildlife shots we'd been missing, but it spells good old free market price inflection point competition for everyone else.
OK, bonus point:
C:
The camera market has been throttled in the past couple of years with cell phone makers finally putting decent little cameras that meet 90 percent of everyman's needs. If you are a corporate strategist at any of the camera/lens companies in Japan, you react to this by pushing lenses. More lenses, different lenses, better lenses. You go and sell those lenses to people and you get higher margins than the undependable camera market gets. This is not a long-term strategy in terms of industrial capacity allocation, but it's a prudent one for a couple years if you can't predict what's going to happen in 18 months. Concurrent with this is a lowering of the camera body price points, as you want to get as many people as possible into your platform so you can, yes, sell more lenses.
If what I formulated above is true, and the Canon folks are seeing it too, then you would see this future in 2014:
- A low-end camera would be launched with much of the functionality of the Rebel/70D (at least the video bits) to capture marketshare for future lens sales. This camera would be small, appealing to those who would otherwise forego an SLR for a phone.
- It would be bundled with a pancake lens to make it feel like a P&S form factor. There's probably some Canon USA product manager who is still steaming because he wanted to introduce same 10 months ago, but the others feared he'd cannibalize their sales, trying to convince themselves that the market would turn around. (And now that he's been established as correct, they'll give this project to one of the minds that didn't have that vision because the company culture rewards respect of seniority). I'm guessing this camera is the one coming in February.
- The P&S is pretty much dying, but Canon will just consolidate the numerous offerings, doing less price stratification and doing more loading up of features (the ones not adding incremental production costs) into the low end.
- The arbitrary use of APS-C sensors as a market splitter between enthusiasts and pros, maintained largely through the discrimination in software/processor versions, will make even less sense now. Pros need crop sensors. Some enthusiasts would move to Canon for a full frame sensor. The entire hierarchy of camera features and names versus sensors will change.
- The naming convention will employ three dimensions of variables: level of "pro-ness"; crop factor; and special feature (like we see sometimes with the appending character on a 1D body).
- Unfortunately, we will see more regional differences, as Canon Japan attempts to exploit market differences by giving the indigenous executives more product and pricing power. Their hope will be that they can maximize margins by taking advantage of instances where, for instance, there remain pockets of high-margin P&S sales. This will largely take the form of certain products not being available in certain markets - those local executives fearing the destruction of a still-alive existing market. To end users, it will seem nonsensical, and there will be many complaints on the forums.
- Canon will launch education and marketing efforts attempting to push a specific class of knowledge: those things you can do exclusively with slr lenses. You will see emphasis on subject isolation; super telephoto tips; focus capabilities unique to larger sensors; etc. They will de-emphasize issues that are common to iPhones and Rebels both.
- A Canon lens competitor will attempt to launch an Android SLR, and it will test disastrously. They may launch it anyways. A variant of this may come to pass: one of the desperate Android tablet producers may purchase one of the lens companies. This would have already happened had the lens manufacturers not been based in Japan, where such things are quite difficult.
- Canon will fall to the temptation to make its body-to-lens interface deliberately more opaque to third party lens makers. AF will be slower on non-brand lenses and there may even be a body introduced that isn't compatible with some key existing third party lenses. Canon will explore selling to third parties access to the API, but this will run into serious antitrust interest on the part of the US Department of Justice. 9 months later the Europeans would jump on that bandwagon too.
All this from reading the entrails of a single Tamron lens launch. You heard it here first. -Tig
And you go around to the rumor sites and you tell them that 2014 is the upcoming "year of the lens." Heard it here first.
Upvote
0
Welcome to CR ... now that is one heck of a loooong first post I've ever read on CR ... now could you please elaborate (oh God, no!), I did not mean elaborate, I meant, could you please summarize, what exactly it is that you want to tell us, coz I kinda lost you after the "crapp!ing ceramics" part ;D[email protected] said:
Upvote
0
The main take away is that the Canon 100-400 is still the lens to beat. I'd have liked to see something blow it away, but they all just try to match a very old lens design. I suspect that any Canon replacement for the 100-400 will cost a lot for a relatively small improvement. That's likely why we haven't seen one yet.
There does seem to be a lot of copy variation in the 100-400, mine is one of the newer ones, and is best at 400mm, which is where it gets used. I really would not look forward to the extra weight for a lens that is basically the same. I'm wondering how it compares at 560mm, which is my 100-400 with a TC.
There does seem to be a lot of copy variation in the 100-400, mine is one of the newer ones, and is best at 400mm, which is where it gets used. I really would not look forward to the extra weight for a lens that is basically the same. I'm wondering how it compares at 560mm, which is my 100-400 with a TC.
Upvote
0
Rienzphotoz said:What does the chart represent? sharpness?Albi86 said:Lee Jay said:
If I understand it correctly, it's your typical Imatest result like on Photozone. The ordinate is LW/PH.
I can't tell if it's center and edges, or center and corners, or center and average. But they go on pretty close, so it doesn't really matter. It's just good
I think they used a 5D MK III. As an approximation based on other available imatest data, 600mm f/8 is very, very close to the 100-400 L at 400mm f/5.6. Only very slightly worse, if you consider the error margin.
Upvote
0
I see ... thanksAlbi86 said:Rienzphotoz said:What does the chart represent? sharpness?Albi86 said:Lee Jay said:
If I understand it correctly, it's your typical Imatest result like on Photozone. The ordinate is LW/PH.
I can't tell if it's center and edges, or center and corners, or center and average. But they go on pretty close, so it doesn't really matter. It's just good
I think they used a 5D MK III. As an approximation based on other available imatest data, 600mm f/8 is very, very close to the 100-400 L at 400mm f/5.6. Only very slightly worse, if you consider the error margin.
Upvote
0
