Tamron 150-600mm Reviewed

[candc]

Re: Tamron 150-600mm Reviewed - Returned

if you are considering the "do" lens then i would really look at the version ii. i know it cost more but you will be happy with the version ii, version i not so sure?

the doii on 7dii with or without the 1.4x is an incredibly good combo.

 

[tomscott]

Re: Tamron 150-600mm Reviewed - Returned

just looked at that link and the do looks like its still a winner.

currently I have the 400 5.6l love it but with a 1.4extender mk 3 its a f8 lens great for tripod shooting but not for hand held. hence my interest on your own journey on finding a lens

Thanks for the info beforeEos Cameras, I think this is a big area for a lot of people and there isn't really a good resource for information across the board anywhere. So I will try to document all of my experience here how ever much its worth. I am just organising my images from the other night and will post a range of tracking images to show its accuracy at 400mm and 600mm. If you are used to the 400mm prime I think the Tamron will surprise you with its IQ, its not as good but its damn close and as the 400mm 5.6 is usually the benchmark although an old lens its impressive. Tracking is another subject however.

if you are considering the "do" lens then i would really look at the version ii. i know it cost more but you will be happy with the version ii, version i not so sure?

the doii on 7dii with or without the 1.4x is an incredibly good combo.

Ye certainly would love an option like that and although my budget is good it just won't stretch to those sort of prices. I have about £2500 I'm willing to spend atm with second hand DOs being around £2-2500. The 400DO II in the UK is sitting around the £8k mark and £6.5k grey market and unfortunately with it being nearly triple the price I can't really stretch to it.

Its also a grey area for me with my insurance, I have a great policy for here in the UK which is relatively cheap for my wedding business and also has £5mil public liability for the motorsport events I shoot, but when you add World Wide cover its goes through the roof. My current policy allows 3 months in any destination (which works as you hop from country to country) and I have £5k worth of cover and its around £500, more than my car insurance. The gear I'm taking currently: 5DMKIII 24-105mm, 16-35mm, and 100mm L macro thats already at the 3.5-4k point not including my laptop and other essentials so have to be careful not to exceed it. As a backpacker I'm much more likely to be a target.

 

[AlanF]

Re: Tamron 150-600mm Reviewed - Returned

You have to be careful with Birdsasart, the great man is very commercial!

According to TDP tests, the old 400 DO is not as sharp as the 100-400 II, both at 400mm and more so at 560mm, especially as you move out from the centre.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2

And the 400-100 II at 400mm on the 7D II (effective reach 640mm) beats the 400 DO II + 1.4xTC on the 1Ds III.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

I'd be very wary of getting the 400 DO now the 100-400 II is available. The 400 DO II is good, but I have resisted temptation so far.

True but with the MKIII extender the results are closer and you still get the full frame ISO capability. Again its a tough one there is no clear winner.

The 100-400 II + 1.4xTC on FF is better than the 400 DO + 1.4xTC III. Ok you do lose a stop and are restricted to centre focussing, but you make up for it on sharpness, contrast and better IS as well as lower weight and cost plus zoom ability.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

The 300mm f/2.8 I or II would serve you better.

 

[drphilgandini]

Re: Tamron 150-600mm Reviewed - Returned

It sounds like you've ruled out the 400DO, Tom, but in case it's still in play, I recently bought a Series I 400DO used for a very reasonable
price here in the US. A friend has both the Series I and the new Series II, and he warned me of (slightly) lower contrast and (slightly)
slower AF on the Series I. I am very happy with this lens, and it is amazingly sharp, reasonably lightweight for it's focal length,
but still a very specialized lens that I don't expect to use all that often.
I prefer my 70-300L IS which is a truly marvelous lens. Yes it could be faster, and longer, but then it wouldn't be the lens it is now.
Depending on your needs and expected use, I doubt you'll be disappointed with the 400DO I. Yes, the Series II is superior, but not at 3x the price.

 

[tomscott]

Re: Tamron 150-600mm Reviewed - Returned

You have to be careful with Birdsasart, the great man is very commercial!

According to TDP tests, the old 400 DO is not as sharp as the 100-400 II, both at 400mm and more so at 560mm, especially as you move out from the centre.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2

And the 400-100 II at 400mm on the 7D II (effective reach 640mm) beats the 400 DO II + 1.4xTC on the 1Ds III.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

I'd be very wary of getting the 400 DO now the 100-400 II is available. The 400 DO II is good, but I have resisted temptation so far.

True but with the MKIII extender the results are closer and you still get the full frame ISO capability. Again its a tough one there is no clear winner.

The 100-400 II + 1.4xTC on FF is better than the 400 DO + 1.4xTC III. Ok you do lose a stop and are restricted to centre focussing, but you make up for it on sharpness, contrast and better IS as well as lower weight and cost plus zoom ability.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=338&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=1&LensComp=972&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0

The 300mm f/2.8 I or II would serve you better.

Yes I completely agree with you!

Again it is all a trade off the 100-400mm with a 1.4 will be fine for anything that is still but as soon as it starts moving centre point at F8 is definitely a disadvantage, so whether the slight sharpness and contrast hit for a lens that is F5.6 and allows for AF point expansion is an advantage. I also agree the 300MKII is definitely king here and I have found an Ex demo for £3799 or you can buy them for about £3.5k grey market then add converters its £4k> which is too much unfortunately.

It sounds like you've ruled out the 400DO, Tom, but in case it's still in play, I recently bought a Series I 400DO used for a very reasonable
price here in the US. A friend has both the Series I and the new Series II, and he warned me of (slightly) lower contrast and (slightly)
slower AF on the Series I. I am very happy with this lens, and it is amazingly sharp, reasonably lightweight for it's focal length,
but still a very specialized lens that I don't expect to use all that often.
I prefer my 70-300L IS which is a truly marvelous lens. Yes it could be faster, and longer, but then it wouldn't be the lens it is now.
Depending on your needs and expected use, I doubt you'll be disappointed with the 400DO I. Yes, the Series II is superior, but not at 3x the price.

Thanks for the comment drphilgandini, glad you like it and agree with your points! If you have any pictures you've taken id love to see them if you want to post them in the thread. I think I would like the lens but like you say the 70-300mm is so good and the 100-400mm is slightly sharper and has more range. I also like the zooms as they do have that versatility. Its a difficult area unless you have a lot of money to spend.

 

[tomscott]

Re: Tamron 150-600mm Reviewed - Returned

So here are the images from the other night. Il repeat so you don't have to go back through the thread

The images all look sharp at this resolution if you go on flickr you will get a better idea links to the albums are at the bottom.

It was good contrasty light so it was good conditions to try the lens out.

I wanted to try some of the points addressed in the thread. BIF, 400mm F5.6 with native expansion AF. 600mm F6.3+ with bird flying toward and horizontally to see if the AF struggles in either. All shots taken hand held.

I had the 5DMKIII set on 1/2000th to reduce 600mm issues, F5.6-8 1600ISO using centre 9 point expansion and case 6 for subjects that change speed and move erratically and lastly IS OFF because of the firmware issue.

Firstly 400mm F5.6 1/2000th 1600ISO bird flying toward and horizontally.

Images have been processed in lightroom, cropped roughly 30% 60 sharpening added (no mask as I would usually target sharpen) and 15 noise reduction

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 400mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

As you can see out of the 17 frames only 2 dropped focus so 88% in focus, the bird was flying fairly well and in a predictable manner which also helped. I found I had no trouble with 400mm in numerous flybys even when the subject was highly erratic.

one caveats - with the lock button engaged at 400mm there is play which equates to 428mm with the smallest of movement. Anything over 400mm moves the aperture to 6.3, I found that i had to hold the zoom function as it would move and found about 1/4 of my shots where I had moved hand position had come out at F6.3 and the hit rate dropped significantly.

Here is an 8 shot sequence of 400mm at F6.3, same settings as above just F6.3

Again images have been processed in lightroom, cropped roughly 80%

Tamron 150-600mm 428mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 428mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 428mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 428mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 428mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 428mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 428mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 428mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

As soon as you go over 400mm where the native F is 5.6 the lens does start to struggle a little. 3 out of 8 shots being missed here with the Bird flying towards the camera so 62.5% in focus this time. But the bird was a little distance away and on a more fussy background.

Onto 600mm, here is an 12 shot sequence of the bird flying towards. F8 this time to aid with DOF at 600mm 1/1600th 1600ISO

Again images have been processed in lightroom, cropped roughly 40%

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

As you can see it has tracked reasonably well, 6 shots are out of focus and 1 or 2 of them I put down to change in direction by the bird and motion blur. So 6 out of 12 50% in focus, but if we discount the 2 frames 66% are in focus. Again as talked about earlier in the thread the 600mm sharpens up well and I haven't really sharpened aggressively it will take 100 sharpening no problem but I'm at 60 here. The 600mm images are certainly softer but at F8 they look good. Again as before the ones in focus have that instant look of being sharp but delve a little deeper and they aren't quite tack.

Anyway here is the last series, horizontal flying bird but not really a predictable flight path bit of a test.

600mm F8 1/1600th 1600ISO

Again images have been processed in lightroom, cropped roughly 80%


Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Tamron 150-600mm 600mm Tracking by Tom Scott, on Flickr

TSP_7241 by Tom Scott, on Flickr

TSP_7243 by Tom Scott, on Flickr

TSP_7242 by Tom Scott, on Flickr

This is a perfect example of my claims throughout the thread. The images seem to be just a touch OOF, 5 out of 10 50% now maybe I'm being a little harsh and they are fairly big crops. The camera is tracking the bird but its just not tack.

This is my findings of 600mm, I think you won't see much more than 60% of images tack in a sequence which can mean the difference between getting that moment where the wings are perfect and not. Although it does vary the last set of images the light was starting to fade and the bird was moving a touch, if the shutter speed was raised a little to 2000 maybe 2500 it may have done better, but these gulls don't move that quickly and it was a little erratic but compared to other birds they aren't the most erratic so 1600 should have been fine.

There were a few instances where it performed better, against blue sky with the light in front of the subject for more contrast. I do have a 63 shot sequence where it seemed to perform very well but its too much to post.

So 400mm very good 8-10 400+ more around the 6-10. I think I'm improving also, its not an easy focal length to use. Its certainly taken me a while to get to grips with it. But like I said its not a lens you can just put on and expect good results from you have to think about what your doing, select the right settings especially shutter speed.

I think if the firmware was updated and I could have used the IS it may have helped but maybe not with those shutter speeds.

At 400mm its very sharp and quick but the play in the lock switch is a real pain and can quickly get frustrating. It also helps a huge amount if you use back button AF, I got much better results than the first time I took the lens out.

All of the images are on flickr so you can go look and zoom in if you like. Here are the album links

400mm
https://flic.kr/s/aHskm75o5E
428mm
https://flic.kr/s/aHskm6L1f5
600mm
https://flic.kr/s/aHskibUrjp
600mm
https://flic.kr/s/aHskm77pej

 

[justaCanonuser]

Re: Tamron 150-600mm Reviewed - Returned

The sigma sport is also an interesting one, same IQ but it sounds like AF is a little improved, although in dusting review he said its similar to the Tammy which isn't really what I'm after. But the problem for me is weight its huge and heavy. I'm backpacking for 4 months and just don't fancy taking something so heavy! Although I would also like to try it out.

For the time being I'm waiting for my shipping instructions for the Tammy then I've decided to purchase the 100-400mm MKII.

Dialed in a bit late, some very impressive images, congrats, Tom!

This thread is very interesting for me because I am making up my mind about adding a supertele zoom to my primes (EF 300, 400, and 500) for traveling. My wife has the Tammy for her Nikon gear and experienced the same as you: good lens for static settings, but its AF is definitely not good enough for real birding including action. After reading many comments and reviews on the web I was getting more and more serious about Sigma's S version because of its better AF performance - according to some of those reviewers. I don't mind its weight, I shoot with my old EF 500/4.5 frequently free hand. But the Sigma S has another massive drawback: it is the Dark Lord of all those 150-600mm zooms available! Here are some illustrative data from Bryan Carnathan's great review:

Sigma S: f/5.6 only up to 320 mm!
Sigma C: f/5.6 up to 387 mm
Tammy: f/5.6 up to 427 mm, optically it is a beautiful engineering artwork!

(http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-150-600mm-f-5-6.3-DG-OS-HSM-Sports-Lens.aspx)

So, maybe, the Sigma S simply focuses sharper because it is darker (f/6.3 maximum in the birder's typical tele range). Finally I come to the conclusion that Canon's EF 100-400/5.6 serves me much better not only in terms of AF performance, it also should be on par with those 150-600's with Canon's quite good 1.4 Mk III TC in real life, at least with the Sigma S. I already have this TC, so my decision is clear: as soon as I need such a tele zoom, I'll get Canon's new 100-400 mm. It is expensive but obviously a fantastic zoom lens.

Many thanks, Tom, for starting this very helpful thread.

 

[tomscott]

Thanks for the comments

Ye thats another reason I bought the tammy instead originally because its a 400mm F5.6 lens whereas the sigma falls short.

I ended up buying a 7DMKII and impressed isn't the word… its really very very good I've been using it with my 70-200mm with 2x extender for the time being while I wait for the 100-400mm MKII that I've also ordered to arrive.

I will post some more impressions when they arrive.

 

[photennek]

Your latest comment begs for this question: how would you compare your gut feelings of 7D2 + 70-200 + 2x combo to the 5D3 + 150-600 combo? Did the above comment mean just 7D2 is very very good, or the combo?

 

[tomscott]

Your latest comment begs for this question: how would you compare your gut feelings of 7D2 + 70-200 + 2x combo to the 5D3 + 150-600 combo? Did the above comment mean just 7D2 is very very good, or the combo?

Yes I meant that the 7DMKII is really impressive. The performance is very similar to the 5DMKIII up to 3200 ISO but the focus system is much better for tracking. The 5DMKIII is geared up to faster glass whereas the 7DMKII has all points cross type to F5.6 so it tracks incredibly well with the cheaper long lenses like the 400mm F5.6, 100-400mm F5.6, 70-200mm with 2x etc

With that in mind I've used the 70-200mm MKII for a long time with the 2x. Im a wedding photographer by trade so is my go to lens, but I also shoot motorsport and its a really good combo. It means that I don't have to carry 2 1.5kg lenses with me and whip the 2x off and have a F2.8. Generally when your trackside you can fill the frame pretty easily and because of that the AF works much better so I barely notice the slow down of the 2x especially if your using the af limiter. I have only recently (last 2 years or so) got into wildlife photography and its has been a good combo. It offers about the same IQ as the 100-400mm MKI so I wasn't really fussed about buying one. Again this is why I went in the tammy direction. But found you get what you pay for.

The most important thing is that the max aperture is F5.6 for AF tracking because the tammy is F6.3 its outside the parameters of the AF system it struggles. At 400mm Its great, sharp and fast AF but you don't buy a large lens like that to use at 400 and at 600 was pretty poor at tracking, but the overall image quality I was very happy with it certainly rivals the 100-400mm MKII at 400. Unfortunately the lens doesn't perform very well with a crop body and is much softer than it is on full frame.

The 100-400mm MKII on the 7DMKII is sharper at 640mm than 600mm on the tammy on a 5DMKIII and its max aperture is F5.6 which means it will track much better. The 100-400mm with a 1.4x is still sharper (very slight) on full frame than 600mm but unfortunately it leaves F8 and single point. The 100-400mm with a 1.4x and a 7DMKII at 896mm is about the same sharpness as a 5DMKIII with the tammy at 600. I will be taking both bodies so is a no brainer for me the 100-400mm performs better than the tammy at pretty much everything, its smaller and has that incredible close focus ability. The only negative is its about 3x the price.

As above if your shooting subjects that generally move horizontally to you or are still subjects the tammy is excellent and I can't recommend it enough. But when you are shooting fast subjects that are quite erratic like birds… its not ideal from my test about 40% of shots were in focus at 600mm, which means you can still pull a good frame but your less likely to get that moment your after. Unfortunately not a lot of wildlife stays still unless they are large mammals and you will end up shooting action at some point.

If your interested in some images here are a few I have shot with the 70-200mm MKII with 2x extender. I found the tammy was faster to focus but the 70-200mm + 2x is more accurate.

This is wide open at F5.6 at 400mm on the 5DMKIII
Courage C26S, Group C, 1989, Sarthe, Silverstone Classics 2015 by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Same again
BMW CSL 1973, Batmobile, Colin Turkington, Jet Super Touring Car Trophy, Silverstone Classic 2014 by Tom Scott, on Flickr

F8 at 400mm on 5DMIII
Puffin in flight with a mouth full of Sand Eels, Farne Islands, Seahouses by Tom Scott, on Flickr

Filling the frame at 400mm F8 on 5DMKIII
Razorbill, Farne Islands, Seahouses by Tom Scott, on Flickr

As you can see its pretty impressive! Just a tad slow to focus at times. Looking forward to getting the 100-400mm MKII.

I have been out shooting red dear with the 7DMKII so will put up some thoughts when I have some time.

 

[tomscott]

Stag and his Doe's, Red Deer, Martindale Valley Cumbria by Tom Scott, on Flickr

7DMKII 70-200mm F2.8 MKII with 2x extender F8 1/500 1250 ISO

Stag and his Doe's, Red Deer, Martindale Valley, Ullswater Cumbria

First time out with the 7DMKII and really impressed with it!

I have been out tracking the Red Deer in the Martindale valley for the last week or so. Beautiful creatures and the largest mammals in the UK. The valley comes alive with deer whaling, Its the middle of the mating season and now is the best time to go out and see them, this is a snippet of what was a huge heard of around 50!! Really incredible to watch. Haven't seen any rutting yet but hope to in the next few weeks.