First reviews for the new Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 are poping up

My one concern: I'm planning on getting the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II once I can scrape together the cash.

Assuming I have that lens, adding a 2x and 1.4x teleconverter (which themselves cost only a bit less than the Tamron lens) would make it a ~200-560mm f/5.2.

70 x 2 = 140
200 x 2 = 400
f/2.8 x 2 = f/5.6

a 2x TC would equal exactly a 140-400mm f/5.6 lens.
70 x 2 x 1.4 = ~200
200 x 2 x 1.4 = 560
f/2.8 + 2f +1f = f/6.8? (so yea, didn't add enough f-stops for stacked teleconverters)
 
Oh, I've never heard of anyone stacking TCs. Didn't think of that, is that even a valid solution?
 
Oh, I've never heard of anyone stacking TCs. Didn't think of that, is that even a valid solution?

Yes, stacking teleconverters HAS been done before. It's pretty much a desperation measure though, and with today's high-MP count sensors of 24MP on APS-C, it's sort of a silly idea. But yes, it has been done, even though the magnification achieved by using a 2x AND also a 1.4x converter is EASILY bettered by a modest crop-in at the computer. A good example might be for a news assignment where, let's say there's a fire and the FD and police have the area cordoned off with a 1/4 mile perimeter...you might HAVE to use whatever you have. And sometimes ANY shot is better than "no shot whatsoever". Some of the paparrazi images take on beaches, for example, on the big celeb sites, are taken with God-awful lash-ups like a zoom + two TC's.

I feel the same way about the 2x converter; unless the converter is EXCEPTIONALLY well-matched to the lens, and there are such pairings, I think it's better to use a 1.4x converter, then crop-in a bit at the computer, rather than lose a full two f/strops worth of light or speed in the field.
 
There's a nice write-up with pics here: Tale of Two Teleconverters

Stacking does indeed seem to be of dubious usefulness; though the 2x teleconverter on its own seems excellent.
 
There's a nice write-up with pics here: Tale of Two Teleconverters

Stacking does indeed seem to be of dubious usefulness; though the 2x teleconverter on its own seems excellent.

Great link, Jerry! THIS single image pretty much shows why adding that second converter is a baaaaad idea: 2.jpg
 
There's a nice write-up with pics here: Tale of Two Teleconverters

Stacking does indeed seem to be of dubious usefulness; though the 2x teleconverter on its own seems excellent.

Great link, Jerry! THIS single image pretty much shows why adding that second converter is a baaaaad idea: 2.jpg
Thank you for bringing up the concern. I'd like to think I would have eventually figured out to go look at comparisons, but I'm not sure I would have. It makes deciding to get the Tamron easier. :)
 
UGH....So my lens was shipped from BH 2 1/2 weeks ago. Last week Thurs. it was declared lost by UPS. The day it showed back up on the tracker (Friday) it was at my local UPS. At this point BH did a recall on it so I couldn't get it. Of course it was still on backorder at BH and they couldn't ship a replacement. Today the lens made it back to BH and tomorrow they are supposed to reship it back out to me. Lets hope it makes it this time. I'm hoping all the time in shipping doesn't cause harm to it. What a trail
Yesterday I picked up the lens from UPS. Tonight I will have the first chance to try it out. Looking forward to getting some shots up with it. I have to admit, the packing is rediculously cheap from Tamron.
 
UGH....So my lens was shipped from BH 2 1/2 weeks ago. Last week Thurs. it was declared lost by UPS. The day it showed back up on the tracker (Friday) it was at my local UPS. At this point BH did a recall on it so I couldn't get it. Of course it was still on backorder at BH and they couldn't ship a replacement. Today the lens made it back to BH and tomorrow they are supposed to reship it back out to me. Lets hope it makes it this time. I'm hoping all the time in shipping doesn't cause harm to it. What a trail
Yesterday I picked up the lens from UPS. Tonight I will have the first chance to try it out. Looking forward to getting some shots up with it. I have to admit, the packing is rediculously cheap from Tamron.

Pics of the packaging? Please. I feel the need to be teased.
 
Oh, I've never heard of anyone stacking TCs. Didn't think of that, is that even a valid solution?

Yes, stacking teleconverters HAS been done before. It's pretty much a desperation measure though, and with today's high-MP count sensors of 24MP on APS-C, it's sort of a silly idea. But yes, it has been done, even though the magnification achieved by using a 2x AND also a 1.4x converter is EASILY bettered by a modest crop-in at the computer. A good example might be for a news assignment where, let's say there's a fire and the FD and police have the area cordoned off with a 1/4 mile perimeter...you might HAVE to use whatever you have. And sometimes ANY shot is better than "no shot whatsoever". Some of the paparrazi images take on beaches, for example, on the big celeb sites, are taken with God-awful lash-ups like a zoom + two TC's.

I feel the same way about the 2x converter; unless the converter is EXCEPTIONALLY well-matched to the lens, and there are such pairings, I think it's better to use a 1.4x converter, then crop-in a bit at the computer, rather than lose a full two f/strops worth of light or speed in the field.

From most results I've seen it's worth picking up a cheap Nikon 1 and using the adapter with a 300mm f/4 or 80-400. The N1 results look far better than almost all stacked TC results I've seen. I don't think non Nikon lenses AF on the 1 series though. It'd be nice to have this at 500-600 with 2.7x crop :mrgreen:
 
Oh, I've never heard of anyone stacking TCs. Didn't think of that, is that even a valid solution?

Yes, stacking teleconverters HAS been done before. It's pretty much a desperation measure though, and with today's high-MP count sensors of 24MP on APS-C, it's sort of a silly idea. But yes, it has been done, even though the magnification achieved by using a 2x AND also a 1.4x converter is EASILY bettered by a modest crop-in at the computer. A good example might be for a news assignment where, let's say there's a fire and the FD and police have the area cordoned off with a 1/4 mile perimeter...you might HAVE to use whatever you have. And sometimes ANY shot is better than "no shot whatsoever". Some of the paparrazi images take on beaches, for example, on the big celeb sites, are taken with God-awful lash-ups like a zoom + two TC's.

I feel the same way about the 2x converter; unless the converter is EXCEPTIONALLY well-matched to the lens, and there are such pairings, I think it's better to use a 1.4x converter, then crop-in a bit at the computer, rather than lose a full two f/strops worth of light or speed in the field.

See, usual doom and gloom stuff from Derrel. Of course you can stack teleconverters. I've got a couple of great shots here - the first is of an eagle, it was taken with 2 teleconverters stacked together:



The second one is a squirrel - taken with 2 2X teleconverters and a 1.4 x teleconverter - sure, it was F/22 but hey, 2400 mm baby!



Ok, so maybe the dynamic range on these isn't quite as good as they would be without stacked TC's.. lol
 
Oh, I've never heard of anyone stacking TCs. Didn't think of that, is that even a valid solution?

Yes, stacking teleconverters HAS been done before. It's pretty much a desperation measure though, and with today's high-MP count sensors of 24MP on APS-C, it's sort of a silly idea. But yes, it has been done, even though the magnification achieved by using a 2x AND also a 1.4x converter is EASILY bettered by a modest crop-in at the computer. A good example might be for a news assignment where, let's say there's a fire and the FD and police have the area cordoned off with a 1/4 mile perimeter...you might HAVE to use whatever you have. And sometimes ANY shot is better than "no shot whatsoever". Some of the paparrazi images take on beaches, for example, on the big celeb sites, are taken with God-awful lash-ups like a zoom + two TC's.

I feel the same way about the 2x converter; unless the converter is EXCEPTIONALLY well-matched to the lens, and there are such pairings, I think it's better to use a 1.4x converter, then crop-in a bit at the computer, rather than lose a full two f/strops worth of light or speed in the field.

See, usual doom and gloom stuff from Derrel. Of course you can stack teleconverters. I've got a couple of great shots here - the first is of an eagle, it was taken with 2 teleconverters stacked together:



The second one is a squirrel - taken with 2 2X teleconverters and a 1.4 x teleconverter - sure, it was F/22 but hey, 2400 mm baby!



Ok, so maybe the dynamic range on these isn't quite as good as they would be without stacked TC's.. lol

Ok, I'll admit you got a little laugh out of me on this one.
 
I tried playing with the lens last night. To my horror, I discovered that the Canon 2X III that I have will not mount to it. :grumpy: This is a big deal for me, I wanted the extra length for moon shots being at 12f or higher was fine for moon work.

On the 2X there is a black inner ring that protrudes into the lens and it bottoms out in the Tamron. This is what appears to be the reason I can't connect the two.

So before you folks buy, note that the 2X doesn't fit. I don't have a 1.4 X to test fit.
 
I tried playing with the lens last night. To my horror, I discovered that the Canon 2X III that I have will not mount to it. :grumpy: This is a big deal for me, I wanted the extra length for moon shots being at 12f or higher was fine for moon work.

On the 2X there is a black inner ring that protrudes into the lens and it bottoms out in the Tamron. This is what appears to be the reason I can't connect the two.

So before you folks buy, note that the 2X doesn't fit. I don't have a 1.4 X to test fit.

I remember reading somewhere that someone with a Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 ran into a similar problem and someone else had mentioned that they use a TC made by bower that did work with their Tamron lens. Might be worth researching.
 
i just stick the camera on my telescope and I can have non-magnified 2,000mm all day.
I've taken the telescope off of the mount and just stuck it on my heavy-duty tripod too, not bad at all.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top