Stunning architectural images Chris, always a pleasure to view here or on Flick
You squeeze the last drop out of whatever glass you have on hand...Cheers Barry
Picked this lens up and have been testing it out. So far pretty happy, though I really liked the 70-200 GII, I just didn't like having to change out the TC to get the equivalent range and like the ability to go wide for side line sports shooting. Felt like I could hand old the 70-200 at slower shutter speeds. I also don't like where the focus ring is and how loosey-goosey it feels. I am constantly grabbing it when I got pick up the camera.
How are people finding centre sharpness and contrast at 300mm? My copy is crisp and sharp wide open all the way up to 200mm but at 300mm F/6.3, my copy exhibits a slight haziness which is partially (but not fully) remedied by stopping down to F/8. For some time I used this lens alongside the Sony 70-200mm G F/4 II which has an undeniable in-your-face punchy and bitingly sharp look throughout the zoom range wide open, but I just couldn't get over the versatility of the 50-300 so ended up keeping the Tamron. It would be good to know whether my expectations at 300mm are realistic (from what I gather, the 70-200 with 1.4x TC is objectively worse than the 50-300 at 300mm)?
ryanli wrote:
How are people finding centre sharpness and contrast at 300mm? My copy is crisp and sharp wide open all the way up to 200mm but at 300mm F/6.3, my copy exhibits a slight haziness which is partially (but not fully) remedied by stopping down to F/8. For some time I used this lens alongside the Sony 70-200mm G F/4 II which has an undeniable in-your-face punchy and bitingly sharp look throughout the zoom range wide open, but I just couldn't get over the versatility of the 50-300 so ended up keeping the Tamron. It would be good to know whether my expectations at 300mm are realistic (from what I gather, the 70-200 with 1.4x TC is objectively worse than the 50-300 at 300mm)?...Show more →
In this class of zoom (including 70-300’s I previously owned from Nikon and Canon) I’ve found some drop in sharpness and contrast wide open at 300mm is to be expected, but my Tamron 50-300 is still quite sharp there and processes beautifully (two posts above I have three images wide open at 300mm and 295mm). If I’m working a landscape scene on a tripod at 300mm I will stop down to f/10 or so, but for less critical purposes I am pleased with the wide open sharpness at the long end on my copy.
ryanli wrote:
How are people finding centre sharpness and contrast at 300mm? My copy is crisp and sharp wide open all the way up to 200mm but at 300mm F/6.3, my copy exhibits a slight haziness which is partially (but not fully) remedied by stopping down to F/8. For some time I used this lens alongside the Sony 70-200mm G F/4 II which has an undeniable in-your-face punchy and bitingly sharp look throughout the zoom range wide open, but I just couldn't get over the versatility of the 50-300 so ended up keeping the Tamron. It would be good to know whether my expectations at 300mm are realistic (from what I gather, the 70-200 with 1.4x TC is objectively worse than the 50-300 at 300mm)?...Show more →
Well being it is f6.3 wide open at 300mm doesn't seem a big issue to stop down to f8. That said mine seems pretty good wide open
This lens continues to impress me. Using it alongside the versatility Sigma 20-200 in Nepal, and there is no comparison in terms of sharpness and overall rendering:
