It worked for me, just now, but it was very slow. The link to a magnified image on his site either didn;lt work, or it just took too long, and I gave up.
RCicala wrote:
I am not a professional working photographer, nor do I ever intend to be one, although I enjoy photography. I simply found out that I enjoy learning about the equipment and optics every bit as fascinating as using it to produce the images.
I don't think of it as much different than back when I was a kid and thought I wanted to be a race-car driver. I did some driving, but found I much preferred being the mechanic and making the equipment function perfectly. With the the difference that most race car drivers really appreciated a good mechanic
Roger
Your reviews are the first ones I go to when considering a lens. They give me a good idea of the resolution to expect if I do all other things correctly. They also provide a good standard of whether my lens is up to the normal for that particular lens or if it is an off spec copy.
My 150-600 is due for delivery this morning, but it will be Friday before I am off work during good daylight hours to try it outside.
In the mean time, I will have to suffice with shooting a $1 bill taped to the back wall of my garage, at 500, 550, and 600mm f/6.3, f/7.1, f/8, and f/11 from about 20'.
AnthonyRay wrote:
Seriously?
You make that sort of blanket judgement about any line of work?
Yeah, I can see starting a car magazine because I knew absolutely nothing about cars, didn't really care about them, but liked the pretty colors they come in.
Or are you just trolling?
DmitriM,
I can't believe you said that. Of course you have the right to your opinion but Rogers well respected around here for the wealth of information he supplies all of us. It's time consuming to do these test and he doesn't have to do them.
Roger also has the advantage of feedback from his customers as to how a lens worked in the "real world". I for one happen to be a fan and do trust his results a lot more than a lot of sights that get one copy of a lens, test it and pronounce to the world it's quality (for profit, by the way). He more than anyone on the forum if not the web has access to more copies of any one popular lens and the where with all to test them against each other.
That's why we should trust the results of a self proclaimed non-photographer IMHO.
BTW: DmitriMs quote didn't get into this post for some reason. It's on page 9, a reply to hoodlum90 post. Guess I don't know quite how to operate this heavy machinery.
My conclusion is that the Tamron 150-600 is good up to 500mm, 600mm is available of course but I would not use it. Resolution drops a LOT at 600mm.
Sure, but how do you stop it at 500mm? Now there is the extra size/weight needed to reach the blurry 600mm end.
I just wish somebody would make a 200-500/5.6 that is sharp throughout. Is there no way to do that for maybe $4K?
EB-1 wrote:
Sure, but how do you stop it at 500mm? Now there is the extra size/weight needed to reach the blurry 600mm end.
I just wish somebody would make a 200-500/5.6 that is sharp throughout. Is there no way to do that for maybe $4K?
In my opinion, we've already seen an example image which will be sharp enough for most serious amateurs to consider using the lens at 600mm:
I can't believe you said that. Of course you have the right to your opinion but Rogers well respected around here for the wealth of information he supplies all of us. It's time consuming to do these test and he doesn't have to do them.
Roger also has the advantage of feedback from his customers as to how a lens worked in the "real world". I for one happen to be a fan and do trust his results a lot more than a lot of sights that get one copy of a lens, test it and pronounce to the world it's quality (for profit, by the way). He more than anyone on the forum if not the web has access to more copies of any one popular lens and the where with all to test them against each other.
That's why we should trust the results of a self proclaimed non-photographer IMHO.
BTW: DmitriMs quote didn't get into this post for some reason. It's on page 9, a reply to hoodlum90 post. Guess I don't know quite how to operate this heavy machinery. ...Show more →
omg, you guys are like little babies...what is it that I said that so offended you all?!?
I just said that it's wise to trust results of tests made in the real world by photographers who know how to use the lenses(and that doesn't include images of dogs,cats and signs in backyards...)
It's common sense that static tests are extremely limited and may not show you issues that may come up during the real world conditions. I personally never read the static tests and only read reviews of photographers when buying a product. I look at samples and read their opinions.
I am sure the lens rental owner is a great guy and all and I never said anything bad about him aside from stating the fact that he is not a photographer. He is in business to rent lenses and probably in amateur photography enthusiast so ***personally I*** would not read his reviews because they will not show me anything I need to see.
cameron12x wrote:
In my opinion, we've already seen an example image which will be sharp enough for most serious amateurs to consider using the lens at 600mm:
In my opinion, that's pretty darn good resolution at 600mm. What does everyone else think?
I agree, and anyone who wants or needs something sharper than that at 600mm can go buy a big prime that costs thousands of dollars more, weighs a lot more, and is not as versatile.
EB-1 wrote:
Sure, but how do you stop it at 500mm? Now there is the extra size/weight needed to reach the blurry 600mm end.
I just wish somebody would make a 200-500/5.6 that is sharp throughout. Is there no way to do that for maybe $4K?
