I'm very interested in this lens. The HH aspect isn't a biggy since I HH my 500 now but sometimes I like to travel light and I grab my 100-400 for that.
I can slap a TC on it for 560mm and f/8 if needed but that is definitely not 600 at f/6.3. What I have notice by most of the shots posted, except from those people I know can shoot long lenses, is that some of the soft shots may be technique but others are definitely processing.
I have pulled a few full resolution shots and processed them and the difference was like night and day. I would prefer raw files to work with but the jpg posted came out very nice with limited work.
I really think this lens might be nice to have as a walk around wildlife lens that can produce acceptable results at a great price. It won't replace my Canon lenses for serious shooting but I'm not always serious when I shoot.
Your suggestion is certainly worthy of consideration, but I wonder how much of the Tamron's seeming lack of sharpness in some of these examples is due to photographer error and/or unfamiliarity with long focal lengths and shooting BIF. Asides from Tony's couple shots, I don't think I have seen anything from anyone who I KNOW shoots BIF regularly with consistently good results.
Like you, I don't have the lens and no rooting interest either way.
You may be right on skills required to use a 600mm lens for BIF. It definitely raises the difficulty level. I have shot the 300 2.8 with a 2xtc for large BIF shots and really didn't have much trouble though. I guess we will all have to wait and see the results being posted as more experience is gained with this lens.
sfink161 wrote:
You're comparing a very good prime to a zoom lens. I had the 400 5.6 and it was the best lens I ever had and sorry I got rid of it. However, I got rid of it in favor of the 100-400 for it's flexibility. At the time, I couldn't justify keeping both lens.
In addition, you're comparing a lens that's been out for a couple of weks compared to one that's been out for years. A much smaller sample size with the Tamron.
You make a good point, but the point I was trying to make is that a BIF photographer already has a system available to him/her that can grab a high percentage of keepers at the same cost. And if some uprezzing yelds a better final image to compete at the 600mm magnification then so be it. If a 600mm shot is recorded as a soft image then there is only so much you can do to enhance it. it's kind of like putting lipstick on a pig.
mark fadely wrote:
You make a good point, but the point I was trying to make is that a BIF photographer already has a system available to him/her that can grab a high percentage of keepers at the same cost. And if some uprezzing yelds a better final image to compete at the 600mm magnification then so be it.
That is true, and the 400 f5.6 will probably nail more BIF shots. However, I still don't believe that the up-rezzed shots will be as good as the 600mm shots.
The big advantage many are looking for is the 150-600mm range in such a light, compact, and inexpensive lens that is so much more versatile.
On static shots, the IQ is still impressive at 600mm. IMO.
You make a good point, but the point I was trying to make is that a BIF photographer already has a system available to him/her that can grab a high percentage of keepers at the same cost. And if some uprezzing yelds a better final image to compete at the 600mm magnification then so be it. If a 600mm shot is recorded as a soft image then there is only so much you can do to enhance it. it's kind of like putting lipstick on a pig.
OK, leaving the argument of uprezzing out of the equation for now because it's a moot point of which hasn't been proven. Let's talk about the lack of flexibility the 400mm L prime lens sticks you with. I nearly missed a shot of an bald eagle eating a fish while sitting on the top of a tree stump when using that lens. The frame was over-filled with the scene to the point where I was fortunate enough to back off to fill the frame properly. Suppose I didn't have room to back off. I would've missed the shot. Suppose while backing off the eagle takes off, again leaving me with no shot. For me, at the time, it was important shot that I could've missed due to using a large prime lens.
Here is the shot I almost missed from 2005 using an old Canon 20D with the 400mm prime lens. Sure it's not a great shot but for back then I was thrilled as it was the very first bald eagle I had ever seen. Some of the frame still got cut off:
OK, leaving the argument of uprezzing out of the equation for now because it's a moot point of which hasn't been proven. Let's talk about the lack of flexibility the 400mm L prime lens sticks you with. I nearly missed a shot of an bald eagle eating a fish while sitting on the top of a tree stump when using that lens. The frame was over-filled with the scene to the point where I was fortunate enough to back off to fill the frame properly. Suppose I didn't have room to back off. I would've missed the shot. Suppose while backing off the eagle takes off, again leaving me with no shot. For me, at the time, it was important shot that I could've missed due to using a large prime lens.
Here is the shot I almost missed from 2005 using an old Canon 20D with the 400mm prime lens. Sure it's not a great shot but for back then I was thrilled as it was the very first bald eagle I had ever seen. Some of the frame still got cut off:
I think everyone agrees that the zoom is more versatile in that it allows for proper framing at a range of FLs. The comparison Mark was making was for BIF photography where you would be using the Tamron at 600mm most of the time, and comparing that with a comparably priced (and oft-used) Canon combination.
Karl Witt wrote:
We are still in the early learning stages with this lens. Unless I see a shot from someone who I know their abilities in both shooting and processing I am going to be doubtful of the results. Unless someone states they have taken the time to do a Micro Adjust at the extreme end I will be cautious of the results.
Mark I respect your talent and abilities, would be great if you could get your hands on the Tamron to shoot and evaluate it, you can borrow mine if you like Comparing the Canon 400 @ 5.6 and the Tamron at 400 f5.6 would likely be indistinguishable, there certainly is more DOF at 400 then at 600mm where the 600 will be unforgiving if not properly calibrated to body and focused on target was we know. I just looked through a bunch of images of a friends with Canon 500 f/4 IS that were all soft, a victim of Micro Adjust that is needed.
There are several using the lens that I am sure are very happy with their results, very happy with their reach and very very happy with what they have spent And then there are those (us) that have shot with the most expensive and the very best that are trying to match that performance and IQ with a lens that costs substantially less................this is where the proofing comes into play. The build quality of the Tamron in hand is excellent, the color that I am pulling from it is most pleasing. Now, with a bit of finessing if I can extract the pinpoint sharpness I need and many of us need/want we will have quite the lens. Yes there is still an issue hanging on AF stop/start but I believe that will be corrected or solved as more info to Tamron is reported.
I want it to work and I want it to work in an amazing way, I will share my positives as well as negatives as they are proven by me on my copy and my gear with my abilities I am keeping an open and positive and receptive mindset for the lens...............
Karl
Thanks for the kind words and I would love to try one of these new Tamrons. I understand what you are saying about 600mm testing the technique of the photographer and the precision of the focus point. As this Tamron discussion has evolved I’ve been recounting the times I’ve shot at 600mm in the past. When using the 300 2.8 and 2x TC the results were excellent shooting large birds @ f6.3. Of course that was a $4000 set up compared to the $1000 Tamron. I’m glad you have the Tamron because if anyone can get the kinks worked out it would be you. I do hope that the servo function gets fixed and everyone can enjoy an inexpensive lightweight 600mm zoom.
I will continue to follow the threads on this lens to see the outcome. I didn’t want to be a Debbie Downer at the party, but I guess that’s what I’ve done.
Following up.
Ok I repeated the DOTtune method on the 70d 3 times tonight and got different results each time. What I did find is that I'm sure my initial testing was not done correctly and the more light i put on the target the better my results.
I ended up at +6 on the long end. I took several pics of my test target and none were as sharply focused as the one I shot manually focused.
They ARE better. Now if I can get a reasonable shot of an eagle in flight I may just keep it!
JVthePT wrote:
Well I think so. Followed the instructions from the website. But now I'm concerned that I may not have done that, second guessing a little. I will re-do tonight and see if it changes anything.
JVthePT wrote:
Following up.
Ok I repeated the DOTtune method on the 70d 3 times tonight and got different results each time. What I did find is that I'm sure my initial testing was not done correctly and the more light i put on the target the better my results.
I ended up at +6 on the long end. I took several pics of my test target and none were as sharply focused as the one I shot manually focused.
They ARE better. Now if I can get a reasonable shot of an eagle in flight I may just keep it!
great.
Make sure with dot-tune you use a cable release for all focusing maneuvers, and turn off IS.
Thanks for the kind words and I would love to try one of these new Tamrons. I understand what you are saying about 600mm testing the technique of the photographer and the precision of the focus point. As this Tamron discussion has evolved I’ve been recounting the times I’ve shot at 600mm in the past. When using the 300 2.8 and 2x TC the results were excellent shooting large birds @ f6.3. Of course that was a $4000 set up compared to the $1000 Tamron. I’m glad you have the Tamron because if anyone can get the kinks worked out it would be you. I do hope that the servo function gets fixed and everyone can enjoy an inexpensive lightweight 600mm zoom.
I will continue to follow the threads on this lens to see the outcome. I didn’t want to be a Debbie Downer at the party, but I guess that’s what I’ve done.
Hey Mark thanks for your acknowledgement. My buddy shot my lens on his 5DMKIII at wide open and then his 300 2.8 with 2x TC and the Tammy was sharper on the LCD and in post. However the weather is killing me as well as time off to catch it to really experiment with AF tracking. I have faith in what Tony is experiencing though and that is a concern. I will have a 1DMKIII to shoot soon so will evaluate AF tracking soon for myself. If there is an issue I am sure Tamron will figure it out, heck I have a few months until birding season to work the kinks out or change my game up!
Take care, my offer is serious if you can get to me you can certainly proof the lens anytime buddy!
Karl
This lens rental company is indicating that the lens won't be ready for "lending/borrowing" until an expected March 24th date. I wonder if Tamron is delaying the next batch release/new/fixed/upgraded release until they have all the kinks worked out.
Is it all that are having issues with auto focus in continuous mode or a small sample of lenses? Just kind of curious as I have my Nikon mount pre ordered.
I had some sun today so I got to try out my lens in good conditions . These are as good as I could get using a bean bag from my truck. All are heavely cropped with NR and light sharpening.
dsr1 wrote:
I had some sun today so I got to try out my lens in good conditions . These are as good as I could get using a bean bag from my truck. All are heavely cropped with NR and light sharpening.
No idea why you are degrading your images with such high ISO's when you don't need shutter speeds that high.
For heavy crops at those ISO's they look pretty darn good. These subjects could have been easily shot at 1/500-1/1000 allowing for a much much much lower ISO and as mentioned higher quality image.
Bean bag rested you could have been at 1/250-1/500 with VC on.
Thanks for sharing, try the new settings next time and show us again!
Karl
dsr1 wrote:
I had some sun today so I got to try out my lens in good conditions . These are as good as I could get using a bean bag from my truck. All are heavely cropped with NR and light sharpening.
Keep them coming Don,
As others said, no need for that high shutter speed, especially when stabilized on a beanbag.
And then there are those (us) that have shot with the most expensive and the very best that are trying to match that performance and IQ with a lens that costs substantially less................this is where the proofing comes into play. The build quality of the Tamron in hand is excellent, the color that I am pulling from it is most pleasing. Now, with a bit of finessing if I can extract the pinpoint sharpness I need and many of us need/want we will have quite the lens. Yes there is still an issue hanging on AF stop/start but I believe that will be corrected or solved as more info to Tamron is reported.
