This topic is in the 2014 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2014Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
p.21 #1Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
mitesh wrote:
I don't believe that's entirely accurate, at least not according to Canon:
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/lenses/image_stabilisation.do
In fact, a stable subject should help the AF system track more reliably.
I didn't say it wasn't effective because it is. Your link reads that the lens uses a microcomputer that performs all kinds of instructions. It has to take longer, albeit mini seconds longer, then not using it. Here is a quote from your link describing a small function of what it does:
This instruction is transmitted to the stabilizer lens group that moves at a speed and direction to counteract the camera movement. This complete sequence is repeated continuously so that there is an instant reaction to any change in the amount or direction of the camera shake.
Remember we are all used to using Canon EF IS lens but they are much more effective then this IS/VC lens admittedly by several testers. Perhaps with the lens being less effective in image stabilization and the fact that is a slower lens that take longer to obtain focus at the long end, it might be more effective with faster shutter and VC off. Just a theory as to why some can't obtain AF at all.
sfink161 wrote
Doesn't the camera have to incorporate with the lens and use the processor to do so? The processor has more processes to perform with VC (IS) on. I've actually seen speed test in the past on this and yes it definitely takes longer with it on. It's no different then the processor on your computer or phone. The processes, the longer it takes to complete it's task.http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/lenses/image_stabilisation.do
In fact, a stable subject should help the AF system track more reliably.
I didn't say it wasn't effective because it is. Your link reads that the lens uses a microcomputer that performs all kinds of instructions. It has to take longer, albeit mini seconds longer, then not using it. Here is a quote from your link describing a small function of what it does:
This instruction is transmitted to the stabilizer lens group that moves at a speed and direction to counteract the camera movement. This complete sequence is repeated continuously so that there is an instant reaction to any change in the amount or direction of the camera shake.
Remember we are all used to using Canon EF IS lens but they are much more effective then this IS/VC lens admittedly by several testers. Perhaps with the lens being less effective in image stabilization and the fact that is a slower lens that take longer to obtain focus at the long end, it might be more effective with faster shutter and VC off. Just a theory as to why some can't obtain AF at all.
Jan 27, 2014 at 07:22 PM
p.21 #2Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Are these uncropped original frames? If not, can you post the uncropped originals for comparison? Is it possible for you to open the RAW files using DPP, zoom in to 100% and with active focus point shown and post a screen capture (see example below)? Thanks!
Uploaded un-cropped images here
http://www.flickr.com/photos/98737992@N08/
Edited on Jan 28, 2014 at 11:32 PM · View previous versions
Uploaded un-cropped images here
http://www.flickr.com/photos/98737992@N08/
Edited on Jan 28, 2014 at 11:32 PM · View previous versions
Jan 27, 2014 at 08:40 PM
p.21 #3Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
ox0312 wrote:
Here you go with the focus points.
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3747/12182883906_be38b7f5ff_b.jpg
Auto Focus Points by ibnemuazzam, on Flickr
Thanks for taking the time to do that. One of the reasons you might not be getting the results you want is that it appears the bird is too far away. From these 100% crop-level screen caps, it appears that the bird is only occupying about 10% of the total frame. Tough task for AF, and not a lot of pixels to resolve details. There could be other factors such as atmospheric distortion, as well.
Earlier quote
Are these uncropped original frames? If not, can you post the uncropped originals for comparison? Is it possible for you to open the RAW files using DPP, zoom in to 100% and with active focus point shown and post a screen capture (see example below)? Thanks!http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3747/12182883906_be38b7f5ff_b.jpg
Auto Focus Points by ibnemuazzam, on Flickr
Thanks for taking the time to do that. One of the reasons you might not be getting the results you want is that it appears the bird is too far away. From these 100% crop-level screen caps, it appears that the bird is only occupying about 10% of the total frame. Tough task for AF, and not a lot of pixels to resolve details. There could be other factors such as atmospheric distortion, as well.
Jan 27, 2014 at 09:06 PM
p.21 #4Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Thanks for taking the time to do that. One of the reasons you might not be getting the results you want is that it appears the bird is too far away. From these 100% crop-level screen caps, it appears that the bird is only occupying about 10% of the total frame. Tough task for AF, and not a lot of pixels to resolve details. There could be other factors such as atmospheric distortion, as well.
Not ideal situation & still early day as I said.
These were only a few shots that were kind of in focus.
My analysis was based on other 200+ shots that I shot that day. Focus Point hitting right on the head but bird is out of focus - no motion blur... just plain out of focus. I will give another try may be on a sunny day & I am very hopeful that this lens will deliver.
Not ideal situation & still early day as I said.
These were only a few shots that were kind of in focus.
My analysis was based on other 200+ shots that I shot that day. Focus Point hitting right on the head but bird is out of focus - no motion blur... just plain out of focus. I will give another try may be on a sunny day & I am very hopeful that this lens will deliver.
Jan 27, 2014 at 09:14 PM
p.21 #5Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
sfink161 wrote:
Doesn't the camera have to incorporate with the lens and use the processor to do so? The processor has more processes to perform with VC (IS) on. I've actually seen speed test in the past on this and yes it definitely takes longer with it on. It's no different then the processor on your computer or phone. The processes, the longer it takes to complete it's task.
No, IS does not slow down AF:
Chuck Westfall says the AF potentially works faster and more accurately with IS on.
"You would be better off with the IS version for skiing photos, for a reason that might not be obvious at first glance. Although chances are good that you'll be using a shutter speed so fast that the IS system has no effect, use of IS will present a steadier image to the camera's AF detection system. Thus, if you're using predictive focus, the IS system may provide better data for the AF system to base its calculations on. However, if you're just zone focusing...Show more →
mitesh wrote
^^^ why would VC slow down AF?No, IS does not slow down AF:
Chuck Westfall says the AF potentially works faster and more accurately with IS on.
"You would be better off with the IS version for skiing photos, for a reason that might not be obvious at first glance. Although chances are good that you'll be using a shutter speed so fast that the IS system has no effect, use of IS will present a steadier image to the camera's AF detection system. Thus, if you're using predictive focus, the IS system may provide better data for the AF system to base its calculations on. However, if you're just zone focusing...Show more →
Jan 27, 2014 at 11:01 PM
p.21 #6Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Imagemaster wrote:
No, IS does not slow down AF:
"You would be better off with the IS version for skiing photos, for a reason that might not be obvious at first glance. Although chances are good that you'll be using a shutter speed so fast that the IS system has no effect, use of IS will present a steadier image to the camera's AF detection system. Thus, if you're using predictive focus, the IS system may provide better data for the AF system to base its calculations on. However, if you're just zone focusing manually and waiting for the subject to pass through the area you've preselected, then you might as well shut off the IS function and save some battery power."
Question number eight here: digitaljournalist.org/issue1002/tech-tips.html
Again, IS on does not slow down AF, indeed it might be beneficial to AF performance even when shooting at shutter speeds that don't necessitate it. If you don't agree go tell Chuck
OK, I'll take Chuck's (and your word) word for it. It's just hard to imagine where the computer world has come to from my old mainframe COBOL programming days where you could set the speed of processing single programs by the sundial rather then the microprocessors of today where you better not blink or you miss something. You had to be efficient to gain every minute of speed when writing code.
No, IS does not slow down AF:
Earlier quote
Chuck Westfall says the AF potentially works faster and more accurately with IS on."You would be better off with the IS version for skiing photos, for a reason that might not be obvious at first glance. Although chances are good that you'll be using a shutter speed so fast that the IS system has no effect, use of IS will present a steadier image to the camera's AF detection system. Thus, if you're using predictive focus, the IS system may provide better data for the AF system to base its calculations on. However, if you're just zone focusing manually and waiting for the subject to pass through the area you've preselected, then you might as well shut off the IS function and save some battery power."
Question number eight here: digitaljournalist.org/issue1002/tech-tips.html
Again, IS on does not slow down AF, indeed it might be beneficial to AF performance even when shooting at shutter speeds that don't necessitate it. If you don't agree go tell Chuck
OK, I'll take Chuck's (and your word) word for it. It's just hard to imagine where the computer world has come to from my old mainframe COBOL programming days where you could set the speed of processing single programs by the sundial rather then the microprocessors of today where you better not blink or you miss something. You had to be efficient to gain every minute of speed when writing code.
Jan 28, 2014 at 05:26 AM
p.21 #7Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Static image comparison on a 7D
Canon 500mm IS + 1.4x f8
Tamron 600mm f8
700mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Canon%20500mm%20at%20700mm%20f8.jpg
600mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Tamron%20600mm%20f8.jpg
Canon 500mm IS + 1.4x f8
Tamron 600mm f8
700mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Canon%20500mm%20at%20700mm%20f8.jpg
600mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Tamron%20600mm%20f8.jpg
Jan 28, 2014 at 02:16 PM
p.21 #8Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
sfink161 wrote:
"You would be better off with the IS version for skiing photos, for a reason that might not be obvious at first glance. Although chances are good that you'll be using a shutter speed so fast that the IS system has no effect, use of IS will present a steadier image to the camera's AF detection system. Thus, if you're using predictive focus, the IS system may provide better data for the AF system to base its calculations on. However, if you're just zone focusing manually and waiting for the subject to pass through the area you've preselected, then you might as well shut off the IS function and save some battery power."
Question number eight here: digitaljournalist.org/issue1002/
Again, IS on does not slow down AF, indeed it might be beneficial to AF performance even when shooting at shutter speeds that don't necessitate it. If you don't agree go tell ChuckOK, I'll take Chuck's (and your word) word for it. It's just hard to imagine where the computer world has come to from my old mainframe COBOL programming days where you could set the speed of processing single programs by the sundial rather then the microprocessors of today where you better not blink or you miss something. You had to be efficient to gain every minute of speed when writing code.
For the Canon in-the-lens IS, the camera just signals the lens to do it's IS thing, starting when you half press the shutter button (or press the rear button, if set to up to focus). The sensing and processing for IS all takes place in the lens. Notice the write up on the Canon site.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/Lens_Advantage_IS
Hope this helps.
Steve
Imagemaster wrote
No, IS does not slow down AF:Earlier quote
Chuck Westfall says the AF potentially works faster and more accurately with IS on."You would be better off with the IS version for skiing photos, for a reason that might not be obvious at first glance. Although chances are good that you'll be using a shutter speed so fast that the IS system has no effect, use of IS will present a steadier image to the camera's AF detection system. Thus, if you're using predictive focus, the IS system may provide better data for the AF system to base its calculations on. However, if you're just zone focusing manually and waiting for the subject to pass through the area you've preselected, then you might as well shut off the IS function and save some battery power."
Question number eight here: digitaljournalist.org/issue1002/
Again, IS on does not slow down AF, indeed it might be beneficial to AF performance even when shooting at shutter speeds that don't necessitate it. If you don't agree go tell Chuck
For the Canon in-the-lens IS, the camera just signals the lens to do it's IS thing, starting when you half press the shutter button (or press the rear button, if set to up to focus). The sensing and processing for IS all takes place in the lens. Notice the write up on the Canon site.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/Lens_Advantage_IS
Hope this helps.
Steve
Jan 28, 2014 at 02:40 PM
p.21 #9Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
sfink161 wrote:
OK, I'll take Chuck's (and your word) word for it. It's just hard to imagine where the computer world has come to from my old mainframe COBOL programming days where you could set the speed of processing single programs by the sundial rather then the microprocessors of today where you better not blink or you miss something. You had to be efficient to gain every minute of speed when writing code.
Separate processors - voila
OK, I'll take Chuck's (and your word) word for it. It's just hard to imagine where the computer world has come to from my old mainframe COBOL programming days where you could set the speed of processing single programs by the sundial rather then the microprocessors of today where you better not blink or you miss something. You had to be efficient to gain every minute of speed when writing code.
Separate processors - voila
Jan 28, 2014 at 02:56 PM
p.21 #10Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
micloi wrote:
Static image comparison on a 7D
Canon 500mm IS + 1.4x f8
Tamron 600mm f8
700mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Canon%20500mm%20at%20700mm%20f8.jpg
600mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Tamron%20600mm%20f8.jpg
Sharpness advantage clearly goes to the Canon but at 10x the cost(whatever it cost I'm not sure) and extra weight I'm not putting up that kind of money. I can't justify it.
Static image comparison on a 7D
Canon 500mm IS + 1.4x f8
Tamron 600mm f8
700mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Canon%20500mm%20at%20700mm%20f8.jpg
600mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Tamron%20600mm%20f8.jpg
Sharpness advantage clearly goes to the Canon but at 10x the cost(whatever it cost I'm not sure) and extra weight I'm not putting up that kind of money. I can't justify it.
Jan 28, 2014 at 07:26 PM
p.21 #11Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
sfink161 wrote:
Canon 500mm IS + 1.4x f8
Tamron 600mm f8
700mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Canon%20500mm%20at%20700mm%20f8.jpg
600mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Tamron%20600mm%20f8.jpgSharpness advantage clearly goes to the Canon but at 10x the cost(whatever it cost I'm not sure) and extra weight I'm not putting up that kind of money. I can't justify it.
Not only that, but we're comparing a ZOOM lens vs. a PRIME lens with a TC. That's a bit of an unfair competition right there.
I think the Tamron does remarkably well in this comparison.
micloi wrote
Static image comparison on a 7DCanon 500mm IS + 1.4x f8
Tamron 600mm f8
700mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Canon%20500mm%20at%20700mm%20f8.jpg
600mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Tamron%20600mm%20f8.jpg
Not only that, but we're comparing a ZOOM lens vs. a PRIME lens with a TC. That's a bit of an unfair competition right there.
I think the Tamron does remarkably well in this comparison.
Jan 28, 2014 at 07:57 PM
p.21 #12Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
I spent some time again today with Canon 7D & the New Tami.
Was a cloudy day with patches of light. Fortunate to get these flying birds around
Canon 7D, 600mm. ISO 640, 1/1600. F6.3, +1 EV, Center Point with assist points, Conti Shot, AI Servo, ~75% of original image
American Black Duck by Photosequence, on Flickr
Edited on Jan 31, 2014 at 07:35 PM · View previous versions
Was a cloudy day with patches of light. Fortunate to get these flying birds around
Canon 7D, 600mm. ISO 640, 1/1600. F6.3, +1 EV, Center Point with assist points, Conti Shot, AI Servo, ~75% of original image
American Black Duck by Photosequence, on Flickr
Edited on Jan 31, 2014 at 07:35 PM · View previous versions
Jan 28, 2014 at 10:56 PM
p.21 #13Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Just for fun, could someone put a tc on their lens to see what it can do?
Jan 28, 2014 at 11:28 PM
p.21 #14Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
mdbrown9999 wrote:
Just for fun, could someone put a tc on their lens to see what it can do?
This shot is at 600mm with the Kenko 1.4x TC attached and handheld with VC on.
Since it is a non-reporting TC, the EXIF shows the focal length as 600mm, not 840mm.
Just for fun, could someone put a tc on their lens to see what it can do?
This shot is at 600mm with the Kenko 1.4x TC attached and handheld with VC on.
Since it is a non-reporting TC, the EXIF shows the focal length as 600mm, not 840mm.
Jan 29, 2014 at 12:05 AM
p.21 #15Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
cameron12x wrote:
Canon 500mm IS + 1.4x f8
Tamron 600mm f8
700mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Canon%20500mm%20at%20700mm%20f8.jpg
600mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Tamron%20600mm%20f8.jpgSharpness advantage clearly goes to the Canon but at 10x the cost(whatever it cost I'm not sure) and extra weight I'm not putting up that kind of money. I can't justify it.Not only that, but we're comparing a ZOOM lens vs. a PRIME lens with a TC. That's a bit of an unfair competition right there.
I think the Tamron does remarkably well in this comparison.
I don't think it is unfair to compare a prime with TC to a zoom. Actually, modern zooms lose little to nothing compared to primes in the same class even without TC.
The problem with the comparison above is that the images are not identically focused. You can see it in the wires in the lower left part, where you can see through. The wires behind are more in focus in the Tamron image, so the main subject is probably slightly out of focus.
sfink161 wrote
micloi wrote
Static image comparison on a 7DCanon 500mm IS + 1.4x f8
Tamron 600mm f8
700mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Canon%20500mm%20at%20700mm%20f8.jpg
600mm
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16187250/Tamron%20150-600mm/7D/Tamron%20600mm%20f8.jpg
I think the Tamron does remarkably well in this comparison.
I don't think it is unfair to compare a prime with TC to a zoom. Actually, modern zooms lose little to nothing compared to primes in the same class even without TC.
The problem with the comparison above is that the images are not identically focused. You can see it in the wires in the lower left part, where you can see through. The wires behind are more in focus in the Tamron image, so the main subject is probably slightly out of focus.
Jan 29, 2014 at 01:42 AM
p.21 #16Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Imagemaster, thanks for sharing that shot.
That is amazing, much better than I expected.
That is amazing, much better than I expected.
Jan 29, 2014 at 04:25 AM
p.21 #17Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Imagemaster wrote:
This shot is at 600mm with the Kenko 1.4x TC attached and handheld with VC on.
Since it is a non-reporting TC, the EXIF shows the focal length as 600mm, not 840mm.
Good shot! Did the Tamron AF? I have a Tamron 1.4x, so if the Kenko AF I guess I can assume that the Tamron should. It works using my 100-400 L lens.
This shot is at 600mm with the Kenko 1.4x TC attached and handheld with VC on.
Since it is a non-reporting TC, the EXIF shows the focal length as 600mm, not 840mm.
Good shot! Did the Tamron AF? I have a Tamron 1.4x, so if the Kenko AF I guess I can assume that the Tamron should. It works using my 100-400 L lens.
Jan 29, 2014 at 06:34 AM
p.21 #18Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Imagemaster wrote:
This shot is at 600mm with the Kenko 1.4x TC attached and handheld with VC on.
Since it is a non-reporting TC, the EXIF shows the focal length as 600mm, not 840mm.
What is the model of the kenko converter you used... I browsed BH and found several models
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/674565-REG/Kenko_PRO3001_4XDGXC_Teleplus_PRO_300_DG.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/674589-REG/Kenko_MC4AF1_4DGXC_TelePlus_MC4_AF_1_4X.html
mdbrown9999 wrote
Just for fun, could someone put a tc on their lens to see what it can do?Since it is a non-reporting TC, the EXIF shows the focal length as 600mm, not 840mm.
What is the model of the kenko converter you used... I browsed BH and found several models
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/674565-REG/Kenko_PRO3001_4XDGXC_Teleplus_PRO_300_DG.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/674589-REG/Kenko_MC4AF1_4DGXC_TelePlus_MC4_AF_1_4X.html
Jan 29, 2014 at 06:55 AM
p.21 #19Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
Kenko C-AF 1.4X Teleplus MC4 DGX
While it is a reporting TC, it obviously does not report its presence to the Tamron, or the EXIF would show 840mm and would not show the f-stop at f6.3.
Yes, it does AF.
While it is a reporting TC, it obviously does not report its presence to the Tamron, or the EXIF would show 840mm and would not show the f-stop at f6.3.
Yes, it does AF.
Jan 29, 2014 at 09:10 AM
p.21 #20Early Adopters - Tamron 150-600mm
I've got that teleconverter. And the Tamron is on order at B&H.
Jan 29, 2014 at 09:17 AM