I know that it's not recommended but I'll try it with a 1.4X TC the next time I get clear skies. I have the Canon and the Tamron TCs so I'll see which one works better with this lens.
The second and third images below are 100% crops of the first image.
JimmyJames wrote:
Let me preface this by saying the long reach of this lens really is not useable for basketball.
I used both a Canon 5D III and Canon 1D Mark II n and had no noticeable difference in focusing or tracking. I also found it hunted for focus no more than my Canon 300mm f2.8L with a 2x and with the limiter set to infinity.
So are you saying that with the 1D Mk II n, that you had no trouble focusing on players moving towards or away from you in AI Servo, using the 500-600mm range? Or did you not shoot in the range?
If you did, do you have a sequence showing it changing focus?
It would seem to be a bit of "overkill" to bring the Tammy indoors to a gym and shoot at 600mm, no? Not to mention it's pretty slow to be effective in indoor lighting?
This lens was made for nice sunny days. Or shooting the moon!
cameron12x wrote:
It would seem to be a bit of "overkill" to bring the Tammy indoors to a gym and shoot at 600mm, no? Not to mention it's pretty slow to be effective in indoor lighting?
This lens was made for nice sunny days. Or shooting the moon!
Which why I asked about his claim that I used both a Canon 5D III and Canon 1D Mark II n and had no noticeable difference in focusing or tracking.
cameron12x wrote:
However, having said that, it still would be very nice to see a follow-on post with some empirical examples of his assertion, as you requested.
empirical examples , just the phrase I was looking for.
It will be interesting to see how this lens performs with Nikon and Sony bodies when those versions come out.
5D3 users....have any of you tried using the Tamron with a 1.4TC (3rd party as I don't believe the Canon's will fit) on a 5D3? Just curious if it'll autofocus worth a d*mn or not.
Imagemaster wrote:
So are you saying that with the 1D Mk II n, that you had no trouble focusing on players moving towards or away from you in AI Servo, using the 500-600mm range? Or did you not shoot in the range?
If you did, do you have a sequence showing it changing focus?
I did not have any sequence shots effectively showing tracking in the focal range. It is too long to really follow the action and NOT have another player get in the way. (See below.) I did have a good sequence in the 300-400 range several times.
As clearly pointed out, indoor basketball is not the place to use this lens but what was available and likely a difficult test for both the equipment and photographer.
JimmyJames wrote:
I did not have any sequence shots effectively showing tracking in the focal range.
In other words, your statement, .... and Canon 1D Mark II n and had no noticeable difference in focusing or tracking. I also found it hunted for focus no more than my Canon 300mm f2.8L with a 2x and with the limiter set to infinity. was a general statement, and in no way disproved the AF tracking problems when using a 1D2 with the Tamron in the 500-600mm range?
Imagemaster wrote:
In other words, your statement, was a general statement, and in no way disproved the AF tracking problems when using a 1D2 with the Tamron in the 500-600mm range?
Yes, it was a general statement and not a scientific test or finding. I based my statement from years of experience shooting tens of thousands of photos per year and hundreds of thousands of photos in my lifetime. I have some idea how I would expect things to work and applied that expertise using the lens in a poor environment. Feel free to use my crude test results and commentary or dismiss them. It matters not to me either way.
Update: Tamron Japan Customer Service has responded to my email, asking for further details, which I did. I also suggested they test the lens on a 7D & 1D Mk IV, in AI Servo, in the 450-600mm range, and with the shutter button held half-depressed as they focus on a distant subject then swing to focus on a nearer subject.
it's fine for static images in good light. af leaves something to be desired in low light or AI servo. a few weeks back i posted 1 image of an eagle in flight, that was because it was the only decent photo out of the sequence.
"it's fine for static images in good light. AF leaves something to be desired in low light or AI servo. a few weeks back i posted 1 image of an eagle in flight, that was because it was the only decent photo out of the sequence. "
