p.4 #1 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
voltaire wrote:
Imagemaster wrote:
I would expect the Tamron to produce comparable BIF shots as these:
How can you expect that type of performance from a zoom vs. a prime? The cost of the lens itself is already several times more for the 500 plus the portability of the 150-600mm lens. I would like to say that's an unreasonable expectation. :-)
I respectfully disagree with you, Voltaire. The samples that Tony posted, well captured as they may be, do not represent an overly challenging AF situation. The bird is well contrasted from the BG and is flying mostly at a constant distance from the lens/camera. I think it is reasonable to expect that a series of shots taken under such circumstances should show consistent focus.
p.4 #2 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
Point well taken, mitesh. We're all entitled to our own opinion. Just weighing costs and lens design with the expectations that's why I had to respond. If the Tamron shot the way a prime did with a 1.4x, we'd all be selling our superteles. :-)
Perhaps my examples weren't ideal lighting. I have to admit, there were some instances where the lens wouldn't lock focus because of lack of contrast but I'd probably keep the lens for my non-birding photos.
Enjoy your day.
Here's a sample of downloaded jpeg, sharpened, resized with not so ideal light.
p.4 #3 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
voltaire wrote:
How can you expect that type of performance from a zoom vs. a prime?
What a crock of a generalized statement. Guess you should tell that to all the pros that will be shooting high-speed sporting events at the Olympics in Sochi with their 200-400's.
Guess my 100-400 is no good either.
The Purple Martin flies about as fast and erratically as a Swallow.
p.4 #4 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
In my non-professional bird on sky shooting opinion, #1 and #3 of the above linked shots seem soft/OOF? Just adding to this already on topic discussion.
p.4 #5 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
jeremy_clay wrote:
In my non-professional bird on sky shooting opinion, #1 and #3 of the above linked shots seem soft/OOF? Just adding to this already on topic discussion.
p.4 #7 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
Imagemaster wrote:
What a crock of a generalized statement. Guess you should tell that to all the pros that will be shooting high-speed sporting events at the Olympics in Sochi with their 200-400's.
Guess my 100-400 is no good either.
The Purple Martin flies about as fast and erratically as a Swallow.
Sorry Tony, I thought you were using a 500mm. I didn't realize it was the 100-400 plus a 1.4x. I apologize.
p.4 #9 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
jeremy_clay wrote:
Imagemaster's shots above which I presume were to show the accuracy and sharpness of his zoom.
Wow, to capture an image this sharp of a Purple Martin in flight with a f/5.6 lens is a tough challenge IMO. The insect in its mouth looks pretty sharp on my monitor.
p.4 #10 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
brimull wrote:
Wow, to capture an image this sharp of a Purple Martin in flight with a f/5.6 lens is a tough challenge IMO. The insect in its mouth looks pretty sharp on my monitor.
Brian M.
Oh for sure, I imagine it must be a very difficult task indeed. On my MBP at least, it seems OOF. Meh no worries.
p.4 #13 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
plover wrote:
Thought this thread was Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only but seeing shots from other lenses
yes, and somehow after being reminded several times what the subject of this thread is people are STILL posting irrelevent images and having non sequitor conversations.
At this point it seems like the tammy is incapable of tracking things moving toward the camera, but that is a conclusion drawn based on a lack of contrary evidence. It's probably an unfair conclusion, but 95% of what's in this thread is irrelevant and most of the few actual sequences posted with the 150-600 are birds moving laterally.
p.4 #14 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
timbop wrote:
yes, and somehow after being reminded several times what the subject of this thread is people are STILL posting irrelevent images and having non sequitor conversations.
Seems like it is turning out to be just another 'showboating' thread
p.4 #16 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
jeremy_clay wrote:
In my non-professional bird on sky shooting opinion, #1 and #3 of the above linked shots seem soft/OOF? Just adding to this already on topic discussion.
Are you kidding me? If you are talking about Tony's shots from the 100-400 immediately above your post then I'd have to say you need glasses or a new monitor. They are tack sharp...
p.4 #17 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
Imagemaster wrote:
So what? Do you think a bird moving laterally stays the same distance from your camera?
Are you trying to say that objects moving fast directly at the camera are no more difficult for the AF/drive motor than moving laterally with a small delta distance
Or put another way, the 100-400 and 400 DO can track BIF on your camera - but that has nothing to do with the question YOU POSED to open the thread. So, I say to your several posts with images from other lenses - so what?
p.4 #18 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
timbop wrote:
Are you trying to say that objects moving fast directly at the camera are no more difficult for the AF/drive motor than moving laterally with a small delta distance
I never said any such thing. You seemed to be insinuating that such shots are of no importance to others viewing this thread.
Or put another way, the 100-400 and 400 DO can track BIF on your camera - but that has nothing to do with the question YOU POSED to open the thread. So, I say to your several posts with images from other lenses - so what?
Perhaps if you had bothered to notice, those images were in reply to a comment from someone. If you have a problem with that, too bad.
p.4 #19 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
The implication of So what? Do you think a bird moving laterally stays the same distance from your camera? is that you believe a few posts of a subject moving laterally is sufficient evidence that the lens can track adequately. Sorry, but I haven't seen enough to draw that conclusion.
In general, the quality of threads on FM has gone down quite a bit in the last few years. There are certainly many reasons why, but what appears to be a prevalent theme is that useful information is drowned out by noise. In some cases, the noise is a legitimate sub-conversation that is also informative. Most of the time it is uninformed opinion that is completely useless, and sometimes it is a vocal minority pushing an agenda. The net result is the same - wading through the chaff to get to the kernel of useful information is just getting to be too damn tedious.
And yes, I know I am now as guilty as anyone, but I have become frustrated watching thread after thread here turning into the same thing.
p.4 #20 · Tamron 150-600 AI Servo sequential shots only
timbop wrote:
The implication of is that you believe a few posts of a subject moving laterally is sufficient evidence that the lens can track adequately. Sorry, but I haven't seen enough to draw that conclusion.
Nice of you to assume what I believe. I don't believe I have seen enough evidence of accurate tracking, regardless of the direction of the subject.
I see at least three reasons for this:
1. The AF responds radically differently with different cameras. That is a bad sign.
2. There are not enough lenses out there for a wide enough feedback.
3. Some users could not get BIF shots in focus regardless of the gear they were using.
