Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
  

Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II
  
 
Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


The 60D (and 70D) cannot AF at f8 so using a 1.4x on any lens slower than f4 is a no-go for AF. This is for viewfinder AF, live view AF does not have an f8 limit and still works, especially on the dual-pixel AF of the 70D.

dalite wrote:
The OP is talking about the 100-400 II.


Fuller explanation: The 1D#s and then 5D3 were the first bodies to AF at f8. On the 1DX and 5D3 f8 AF was limited to the center point only. With the 1DX2, 5D4 and 80D this is still generally true with the special exception of using the 1.4x3 with the 100-400 II and 200-400 which allow AF with additional focus points in the central cluster of AF points.

For purposes of this thread, the 80D is the first ##D camera to provide f8 AF. I don't know about other recent cameras like the 77D since I haven't looked at their specs. The Tamron and Sigma 150-600s are f6.3 at their long end - technically too slow for AF on earlier bodies (speced to AF at f5.6 and faster) - but get away with it on bodies like the 60D.



Sep 11, 2017 at 03:08 PM
hokiejokey
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Jeff Nolten wrote:
For purposes of this thread, the 80D is the first ##D camera to provide f8 AF. I don't know about other recent cameras like the 77D since I haven't looked at their specs. The Tamron and Sigma 150-600s are f6.3 at their long end - technically too slow for AF on earlier bodies (speced to AF at f5.6 and faster) - but get away with it on bodies like the 60D.


My 7dii will autofocus at F/8 (100-400ii, 1.4iii). Center point cross type and four adjacent points non-cross type.

As to the 70d, before I bought the 7dii I owned a 70d and rented both the 100-400ii and Sigma 150-600 sport (the heavier "higher quality" version that I believe the Tamron G2 was build to compete with).

I found the Sigma to be way to heavy to walk around with compared to the 100-400ii. The Sigma was sharp at 200--400, but if you were buying it in hopes of getting that kind of sharpness at 600 I don't think you would be too happy. I understand the Tamron and Sigma are different lenses, but just something to be aware of.

Attached is a photo with my 70d and the 100-400ii. It was one of the first shots I took, just a mosquito sitting on a rope. Jaw dropping sharpness, IMHO.






  Canon EOS 70D    EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM lens    330mm    f/6.3    1/800s    100 ISO    0.0 EV  




Sep 11, 2017 at 08:37 PM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Oh, sorry I forgot the 7D2 which predates the 80D in f8 AF. It behaves like the 5D3, single point f8 (with assist points) AF only. The 80D does not have assist points, this can all get very confusing if you try to list all the distinctions.


Sep 11, 2017 at 09:36 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Jeff Nolten wrote:
The 60D (and 70D) cannot AF at f8 so using a 1.4x on any lens slower than f4 is a no-go for AF. This is for viewfinder AF, live view AF does not have an f8 limit and still works, especially on the dual-pixel AF of the 70D.

Fuller explanation: The 1D#s and then 5D3 were the first bodies to AF at f8. On the 1DX and 5D3 f8 AF was limited to the center point only. With the 1DX2, 5D4 and 80D this is still generally true with the special exception of using the 1.4x3 with the 100-400 II
...Show more

Just one small clarification (or maybe I'm reading it wrong) but the 5D4 and 1DX2 don't have the limited lens combos like 80D and 6D2 do for f/8 AF. Basically if you are using a Mk III TC to get to f/8 you get all 61 points with any lens/TC combo. Older TCs limit the functionality. There is a overly complicated list in their respective manuals.



Sep 11, 2017 at 10:16 PM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


hokiejokey wrote:
My 7dii will autofocus at F/8 (100-400ii, 1.4iii). Center point cross type and four adjacent points non-cross type.

As to the 70d, before I bought the 7dii I owned a 70d and rented both the 100-400ii and Sigma 150-600 sport (the heavier "higher quality" version that I believe the Tamron G2 was build to compete with).

I found the Sigma to be way to heavy to walk around with compared to the 100-400ii. The Sigma was sharp at 200--400, but if you were buying it in hopes of getting that kind of sharpness at 600 I don't think you would be too
...Show more

Blanket statement about the sharpness of the SIgma which isn't true. I have no issues with mine @600mm. It's very sharp all the way to about 550mm and sharp @ 600mm even wide open.

Also that mosquito is actually a giant robber fly, some species can get to 2" long and they can take down dragon flies on the wing. Thank god they don't get a lot bigger for our sake.



Sep 12, 2017 at 02:55 AM
diverhank
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Wildbruce wrote:
Thank you everyone for your feedback on the Canon 100-400 II and the Tamron 150-600 G2 lenses. I guess I'll go with the Canon since it seems to focus faster.


I have both the Tamron version 1 and the Canon 100-400 II and I can't tell the difference in focusing speed. They are about the same...at least both are plenty fast for BIF. I must have had a very sharp Tamron version...with the 1.4x version II (I don't have III) , I can't really tell if it's any better than the Tamron version 1. Actually most of the time, it seems to be worse. Without the 1.4, the 100-400 II is really sharp, YMMV. For this reason I'm using both...the 100-400 shines if you don't need the extra reach.



Sep 12, 2017 at 03:10 AM
mommacobb
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Thanks for the replys! I appreciate all help.


Sep 12, 2017 at 01:20 PM
technic
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Pixel Perfect wrote:
Also that mosquito is actually a giant robber fly, some species can get to 2" long and they can take down dragon flies on the wing. Thank god they don't get a lot bigger for our sake.


One time I spotted a damselfly with very erratic flight; when it landed I understood why ;-)




Sep 12, 2017 at 01:44 PM
Colin F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


I was going to create a new thread, but thought it might be best to chime in here as this thread is already on point.

As some of you may recall, I recently sold my 500 f/4 IS (the previous, heavier IS version), as I had convinced myself to get the new “II” version of the 500 f/4. But then, after it sold, in a sudden revelation I decided that it just wasn’t worth the huge outlay of funds, given that I already had good images of most all local bird species. So I decided a few months ago to see how I might feel about just having & using the Tamron 150-600 G2 for all my bird photography, in consort with the 5DIV (also have 7DII, but now seldom used).

The smaller size and lighter weight has been hugely “liberating”. I’m having more fun on my outings now, can easily go without tripod, and am actually getting more keeper images due to being more agile, flexible, and having some zoom capabilities. I don’t return to my truck feeling “beat” from schlepping around the big prime on a tripod & gimbal.

The 30MP of the 5DIV certainly makes the Tamron G2 lens shine, but I’m starting to wonder if the Canon 100-400 II would actually result in better image quality, even after a little cropping. I have historically not related at all to the 100-400 lens, as even with the 500 f/4 with 1.4 TC on a 1.6 crop body (1120mm equiv), there’s never enough reach for those birds which more often than not, want to keep their distance. So a part of my brain recoils at the thought of going backwards to 400mm.

The thing is, I still own the 1.4 III and 2x III Canon teleconverters, so I have to wonder if the results with the 1.4x would be superior to the naked Tamron. When considering the answer to this seemingly common question, I think it important to consider first what body one is using, so for the 5DIV (and potentially the 7DII), would I experience better image quality with the 100-400 II (with 1.4 TC) over the Tamron? Co$t factor aside, the smaller, lighter reality of the Canon lens is very appealing if the results are actually superior.

Or is the difference actually going to be so incredibly slight, that it’s all awash?

And while we’re at it, what would the results be like with the 100-400 II with the 2x III TC on a 5DIV (and 7DII)?

Thanks




Oct 28, 2017 at 02:35 AM
D.Hussey
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Max_Pain wrote:
That's what I did. I had the Sigma 150-600 C and ended up going to the 100-400L II and 1.4x III. Seems to work alright, although the loss of light is noticed. But everything else is better. So I guess the tradeoff is worth it.


Same with me .... Had the 150-600C but after snapping it in half due to a clamp failure during an astronomy outing I replaced it with the 100-400II .... I do miss the extra reach a little, but overall I would say my 'Keeper Rate' has doubled, especially under anything other than ideal conditions (good light, slow moving or static subjects) where the Sigma was actually very good




Oct 30, 2017 at 02:40 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Colin F wrote:
I was going to create a new thread, but thought it might be best to chime in here as this thread is already on point.

As some of you may recall, I recently sold my 500 f/4 IS (the previous, heavier IS version), as I had convinced myself to get the new “II” version of the 500 f/4. But then, after it sold, in a sudden revelation I decided that it just wasn’t worth the huge outlay of funds, given that I already had good images of most all local bird species. So I decided a few months ago to
...Show more

I can't comment on the Tamron G2 specifically. I owned the 100-400II/1.4TCIII and the Sigma C at the same time. The IQ is a wash once you put the TC on the 100-400II. I think the Tamron would be very similar. If the Tamron is performing well at f/6.3 wide open then you are giving up 2/3 stop with the 100-400/1.4. My Sigma definitely did better at 7.1 and 8.0 so I was usually on par with the Canon combo anyways. The main reason I sold the Sigma was because I didn't like how it stabilized the VF compared to the Canon. Also the Canon AF was better bare lens and at least as good even with the 1.4TC. Again the Tamron may be different, I've read it has better IS than the Sigma.

If you use the 100-400II without TC I think you will be noticing the lack of magnification for birds.

2xTCIII on my 100-400II never gave me anything good. Cropping a 1.4TC shot was always better and you are stuck with either manual focus or LV focus at f/11 with the 2xTC.



Oct 30, 2017 at 03:59 PM
Colin F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


^^^ Thanks Geoff. So this becomes a tough call for me then. If I'm decided to not own a 500 f/4 prime lens due to size & weight, then the Canon 100-400 II (with 1.4 III) seems to be the best way to go if it is indeed comparable to the Tamron/Sigma 150-600s in IQ, and even smaller and lighter to achieve the most minimal package. But the cost is considerable, and it is actually slower with the 1.4 on.

I suppose the new Tamron 100-400 will basically be the same sort of scenario (?), or will it even play well with the Canon 1.4 III extender?



Oct 30, 2017 at 04:19 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Colin F wrote:
^^^ Thanks Geoff. So this becomes a tough call for me then. If I'm decided to not own a 500 f/4 prime lens due to size & weight, then the Canon 100-400 II (with 1.4 III) seems to be the best way to go if it is indeed comparable to the Tamron/Sigma 150-600s in IQ, and even smaller and lighter to achieve the most minimal package. But the cost is considerable, and it is actually slower with the 1.4 on.

I suppose the new Tamron 100-400 will basically be the same sort of scenario (?), or will it even
...Show more

If you go for a Tamron (or Sigma) I'd stick with their own 1.4TC...both have new versions. My Canon 1.4TCIII worked on my Sigma C at first and then in a FW update to the lens it broke functionality on all my newer bodies (only 1D4 still worked). This wasn't mentioned in any of the FW notes. Maybe Tamron lenses work fine with the Canon TC but Sigmas don't anymore.
I would guess (but not sure) that the Tamron 100-400 with 1.4TC will report f/8 instead of f/9 to the camera to allow AF (just like it reports 5.6 instead of 6.3 to have AF on non-f/8 bodies). My Sigma/1.4 at f/9 wide open did AF on 7D2 and 1DX.



Oct 30, 2017 at 04:32 PM
David Garcia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Wildbruce wrote:
Hello everyone,

I've been reading the posts in this forum for quite awhile now and have learned a lot about Canon camera gear. It has been very informative. So now I've decided to post a question. I really enjoy doing wildlife and sports photography and was considering the purchase of either the Tamron 150-600 G2 (second generation) or the Canon 100-400 II. Does anyone have any experience using both of these lenses on a crop body? (I use a Canon 70D). If so, how does the autofocus, image stabilization, and image quality compare with one vs the other.


I had the Tammy 150-600, but now have the Sig and the 100-400 ll. If I could have only one, I would pick the 100-400 ll. It's faster to focus and performs better in low light. The Tammy and Sig hunt more than the Canon and have a harder time acquiring focus in low light. The focus is lightning fast on the Canon and it is sharp. I also prefer the IQ of the Canon over the other two.



Oct 31, 2017 at 12:07 AM
Colin F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


A friend of mine was kind enough to lend me his 100-400 II this morning for a couple of days, so I thought I’d report some preliminary findings.

Using a digital weigh scale, I came up with these numbers:

Tamron 150-600 G2 (with hood): 2117 grams

Canon 100-400 II (with hood): 1703 g

Canon 1.4 III extender (sans caps): 226 g

…making the Canon 100-400 II + 1.4 III extender option 1929 g; only 188 g lighter than the Tamron!

For my usage (birds), the extender would be on the 100-400 99% of the time, so it’s not much of a weight savings. Carrying it around today with a sling-strap, it felt only slightly lighter.

Sans body, (with hoods reversed), the Canon is only 2.5” shorter. Tammy hood = 5” dia; Canon hood = 4.25” dia. So not a huge difference there either for travelling/airline purposes.

When I carry my Tamron with a sling-strap (strap attached to the lens foot), I tend to walk with my hand lightly clasping the lens foot, taking about 20% of the weight, and preventing the camera & lens from bouncing and swinging back & forth. On my first reach for the Canon foot, I instantly found that because it is so tiny, trying to hold it was uncomfortable and frustrating; I wound-up having to support & hold it by placing my hand under the lens. Not ideal. I tried attaching an Arca Swiss plate, but that was very sharp & uncomfortable. The Tamron foot is smooth/rounded and very comfortable, and of course has Arca Swiss built-in. Nice! The RRS replacement foot for the 100-400 appears to be about the same length as the stock one, so I wonder if there is a longer one available. Anybody know?

AF speed of the 100-400 II is indeed amazing. The Tamron G2 (at least with the 5DIV) is actually pretty snappy, but the Canon is much faster, and feels great. I can see how experiencing that sort of AF speed would be addictive, and going backwards in speed, objectionable. Like going from 14 FPS to 7.

I was only able to take a few images of a Golden-crowned Sparrow (in good light), and on the computer could see the increase in sharpness that everyone raves about, but this was not a side by side comparison, which I’ll attempt to do tomorrow if time allows.

If further tests/comparisons reveal that the Canon (with 1.4 III) is dramatically sharper than the G2, then I’ll have to think further if the added cost and other shortcomings of the Canon would be worth it. A part of me sees value in having f/6.3 at 600mm (or whatever the Tamron actually is – 570mm?), so there’s lots to consider. I was worried about not having anything wider than f/8, but the DOF even at that can be razor-thin.

More later…




Edited on Oct 31, 2017 at 03:30 PM · View previous versions



Oct 31, 2017 at 02:25 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Colin F wrote:
A friend of mine was kind enough to lend me his 100-400 II this morning for a couple of days, so I thought I’d report some preliminary findings.

Using a digital weigh scale, I came up with these numbers:

Tamron 150-600 G2 (with hood): 2117 grams

Canon 100-400 II (with hood): 1703 g

Canon 1.4 III extender (sans caps): 226 g

…making the Canon + 1.4 extender option 1929 g; only 188 g lighter than the Tamron!

For my usage (birds), the extender would be on the 100-400 99% of the time, so it’s not much of a weight savings. Carrying it around today with
...Show more

Good info. Nothing like having both in hand to make a proper decision. I'll be interested to see if you notice much difference in sharpness with a more controlled test (especially with 1.4TC on the Canon). Did you see if the Canon 1.4TC works on the Tamron lens?

I'm using the Kirk foot on my 100-400II but it isn't all that great to hold either. Probably similar to the RRS one.



Oct 31, 2017 at 04:22 AM
Colin F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


arbitrage wrote:
I'll be interested to see if you notice much difference in sharpness with a more controlled test (especially with 1.4 TC on the Canon).


Based on what I saw today in a few shots. I suspect things will be sharper with the 100-400 II.


Did you see if the Canon 1.4 III TC works on the Tamron 150-600 G2 lens?

Someone else here asked about that some time ago, so I did some tests for him at the time:

7DII: No AF, but both extenders worked.

5D IV: The AF did hunt back & forth, but wouldn't lock on anything. Both extenders worked in taking "an exposure".


So for being usable, no.




Oct 31, 2017 at 04:33 AM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


Colin F wrote:
I suppose the new Tamron 100-400 will basically be the same sort of scenario (?), or will it even play well with the Canon 1.4 III extender?


Don't know if this is relevant. I have the new Sigma 100-400 in addition to the Canon 100-400 II and 1.4xIII. The Sigma only reports "Err" on both my 5D4 and 80D when used with the Canon 1.4xIII. It works fine on both cameras without the extender. Sigma makes an extender that presumably will work.

So far the Sigma seems a fine lens compared to the Canon - better than the 100-400 original. Good IS after adjustment with the dock. It may not stand up to using with a 1.4x as well as the Canon but that is not my intention. It weighs nearly a pound less and costs less than half. Just a tad heavier than the 70-300L and about 2/3 the cost of that one. I only use it hand held and as a lighter alternative to the Canon for non reach intensive travel. Its noticeably lighter on my back.

I thought about one of the 150-600s but I'd use the Canon 100-400 with extender in those circumstances and its more compact for carrying it there. My travels aren't as bird intense as yours however.



Oct 31, 2017 at 03:25 PM
Colin F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


A bit of searching revealed that this Hejnar replacement foot seems to be the only one available that is larger, making the foot a usable "handle" for when carrying the 100-400 II lens/camera with a sling-strap. Not sure how comfortable it would be, but best option at this point.

Adds another $100.00 to the already pricey switch from the Tamron to the Canon, and likely adds a few grams.

http://www.hejnarphotostore.com/product-p/h116.htm


It was a crazy day, so no time to do any comparison test shots.



Nov 01, 2017 at 12:36 AM
Colin F
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Tamron 150-600 G2 and Canon 100-400 II


I did some testing between the Canon 100-400 II and Tamron 150-600 G2 this afternoon, with the 5DIV and 7DII. While I kept my tripod in one location and shot at a single, vertical perch (with lots of visiting small birds), it wasn’t ideal as the light was changing quite a bit, and the light was generally on the poor side, requiring ~1600 ISO.

So, while this little exercise was by no means scientific, it did reveal that the Canon lens does outperform the Tamron. Not by much mind you, it was close. There’s just that “certain sharpness” with the Canon, and that “certain softness” with the Tamron. The Canon is ridiculously sharp without a TC on, almost better if you crop instead of using the 1.4 TC…..almost.

For added interest, I also tried the 2x III TC on the Canon lens. With both the 5DIV and 7DII, I had no AF with the 2X III. Shouldn’t I have had at least the centre point on both bodies? From those few test shots (in terrible light) it seems like a reasonably good image could be had (in good light) using the 2X, so if I get a 100-400 II, it might be worth hanging on to.

No AFMA was done with the Canon, so not sure if that would be needed.

So after buying a new 100-400 II, and the required Hejnar replacement foot, and selling my Tamron at a loss, the switch would cost about $1300.00 CDN extra. That’s a fair bit considering the closeness of the two lenses, and the fact that if I kept the Tamron, I could sell the two TCs for a good chunk, rendering the cost to switch actually more like $2100.00 extra.

Not an easy choice.


*I'd like to hear from the O/P (Wildbruce) on what you've decided.


Edited on Nov 02, 2017 at 12:59 AM · View previous versions



Nov 02, 2017 at 12:04 AM
1      
2
       3       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password