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

[JacaRanda]

This one is seeming like a no brainer already. I have a trigger finger on selling my 300f4.

 

[ruifo]

I plan on being an early adopter of this lens when it makes it's way out to the general public. I got to play with it at Imaging in Phoenix and I was impressed. I was going to be saving up for the Canon 600 super but I am going this route instead.

Good to know someone from the forum already payed with it.
Please share any impressions.

I am more and more convinced to enter the buying list for this new lens too.

 

[ruifo]

[h=1]Tamron 150-600mm unbox and first touch[/h]

 

[badrano]

Wow! Seeing the lens attached to a camera and be handled by a human really gives a good perspective on the size of this lens.

Given some other recent posts, it could be hard to justify being an amateur photographer if caught with this lens in our possession. :mrgreen:

"I swear ociffer, I know the lens is big, but I'm just an amateur" And, yes, I purposely misspelled officer.

Awesome video ruifo!

 

[Propsguy]

Way too much compromise between aperture and focal length.... variable zooms are annoying and only getting 6.3 at the long end of this means having to crank up the iso for anything that moves. Most (or many, at least) hobbyist photographers have up to 300mm covered with variable zooms already, and I wonder if they could produce a 400 - 600 F4 for something relatively close to the price of this... it would be a much better addition to the typical lens lineup that people already own. My bet is that this lens will sell well, but it's limitations will have it living in the photographers' closet before very long.

 

[coastalconn]

Way too much compromise between aperture and focal length.... variable zooms are annoying and only getting 6.3 at the long end of this means having to crank up the iso for anything that moves. Most (or many, at least) hobbyist photographers have up to 300mm covered with variable zooms already, and I wonder if they could produce a 400 - 600 F4 for something relatively close to the price of this... it would be a much better addition to the typical lens lineup that people already own. My bet is that this lens will sell well, but it's limitations will have it living in the photographers' closet before very long.

A 400-600 F4 for a grand? your crazy! Nikon 200-400 F4 = 6K, canon 200-400 F4 = 12K canonikon 500 or 600 f4 = 8K--12K! You are only talking 1.3 stops slower and less than 1/8 the price. With todays cameras "cranking up the ISO" isn't too bad. Many people shoot with the 50 or 150 - 500 Sigmas quite regularly so I don't think this lens is very limiting at all for wildlife photographers on a budget. This lens appears to have fast AF, (accuracy is unknown at this point), good stabilization, respectable optics and a 6 year warranty. There isn't much to not like about this lens. It will perform every bit as well as the 2.7K Nikon 80-400 AF-S but give the bonus of an extra 200mm ... just my humble opinion...

 

[Braineack]

Way too much compromise between aperture and focal length.... variable zooms are annoying and only getting 6.3 at the long end of this means having to crank up the iso for anything that moves. Most (or many, at least) hobbyist photographers have up to 300mm covered with variable zooms already, and I wonder if they could produce a 400 - 600 F4 for something relatively close to the price of this... it would be a much better addition to the typical lens lineup that people already own. My bet is that this lens will sell well, but it's limitations will have it living in the photographers' closet before very long.

oh no! you gotta crank up the ISO!!! That's 1/3 of a stop above 5.6 at the 300mm most hobbyist photographers are shooting at. This lens at 300mm is at 5.6 as well, and you're barely losing anymore light at another 300mm of reach. Yeah, so, you'll have to crank 1/3 of a stop of out your iso for anything that moves.

400-600 f/4 would be huge and a few thousand dollars.

I bet this lens will sell well and be living on a lot of cameras in the field taking amazing pictures.

 

[DarkShadow]

My Next lens on the list is looking pretty sweet.Thanks for sharing the reviews.

 

[Propsguy]

.... OK so F4 is a stretch anywhere near this pricepoint... that's pretty obvious. But, the question is, if they made the lens simpler, used similar materials etc... could they trade off the low end of zoom range and gain some aperture to produce a lens costing "something relatively close to the price of this"?.... can they apply whatever voodoo and black magic they used to make this lens affordable to a lens that offers more aperture and less range?

If cranking up the iso was a non issue in photography, then we wouldn't spend the money on fast lenses. Take this lens into the forest where everything is bathed in shadow and tell me that having a lowest aperture of 6.3 at the long end isn't limiting... take this lens to the racetrack on a rainy day... take this lens to an indoor equestrian show or a hockey game... take it to the opera or any live stage show... take this lens anywhere where lighting is not ideal and it's limitations will become extremely evident.... especially when attempting to shoot at 600mm and you have to increase your shutter speed.

No doubt this lens offers great value for what it is, and it's great to see that it's sharper than expected and that it renders out of focus areas very nicely, but the fact is, the long end of this lens is what is actually appealing to people, and it would be more interesting to see manufacturers putting their R&D energy into figuring out how to give photographers affordable fast lenses... and in this case, taking away a portion of zoom range could be an approach that might begin to make that possible.

Maybe the good stabilization performance of this lens will make it more useful than I suspect... but I suspect that most of the people who purchase this lens will have buyers remorse before long. I know that for my style and my needs, I give it a pass...

 

[ruifo]

If you think in incremental steps, this is a great move already. Nothing that affordable, that long, and that fast was ever released before.
Let Tamron and other work their magic and see how this move can advance in the future, that does not cost USD $25,000/$26,000, like the Sigma APO 200-500mm F2.8.

 

[Propsguy]

If you think in incremental steps, this is a great move already. Nothing that affordable, that long, and that fast was ever released before.
Let Tamron and other work their magic and see how this move can advance in the future, that does not cost USD $25,000/$26,000, like the Sigma APO 200-500mm F2.8.

But I want a 400 - 800 F2 VRII for $1200.00 RIGHT NOW, DAMMIT!!...

 

[ruifo]

If you think in incremental steps, this is a great move already. Nothing that affordable, that long, and that fast was ever released before.
Let Tamron and other work their magic and see how this move can advance in the future, that does not cost USD $25,000/$26,000, like the Sigma APO 200-500mm F2.8.

But I want a 400 - 800 F2 VRII for $1200.00 RIGHT NOW, DAMMIT!!...

hehehe

You will need something like that:
http://www.megapixel.co.il/mega/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Zeiss-big-lens.jpg

 

[coastalconn]

.... OK so F4 is a stretch anywhere near this pricepoint... that's pretty obvious. But, the question is, if they made the lens simpler, used similar materials etc... could they trade off the low end of zoom range and gain some aperture to produce a lens costing "something relatively close to the price of this"?.... can they apply whatever voodoo and black magic they used to make this lens affordable to a lens that offers more aperture and less range?

300 F4 is doable and has been at this price point for a long time at 300mm.. Canon and Nikon both make them. Next stop Canon 400 F5.6, 100-400 or Nikon 80-400 AF-S , APX 1300, 1600 and 2700... "Gaining aperture" requires more glass and Bigger glass, therefor more money...

If cranking up the iso was a non issue in photography, then we wouldn't spend the money on fast lenses. Take this lens into the forest where everything is bathed in shadow and tell me that having a lowest aperture of 6.3 at the long end isn't limiting... take this lens to the racetrack on a rainy day... take this lens to an indoor equestrian show or a hockey game... take it to the opera or any live stage show... take this lens anywhere where lighting is not ideal and it's limitations will become extremely evident.... especially when attempting to shoot at 600mm and you have to increase your shutter speed.

No doubt this lens offers great value for what it is, and it's great to see that it's sharper than expected and that it renders out of focus areas very nicely, but the fact is, the long end of this lens is what is actually appealing to people, and it would be more interesting to see manufacturers putting their R&D energy into figuring out how to give photographers affordable fast lenses... and in this case, taking away a portion of zoom range could be an approach that might begin to make that possible.

Maybe the good stabilization performance of this lens will make it more useful than I suspect... but I suspect that most of the people who purchase this lens will have buyers remorse before long. I know that for my style and my needs, I give it a pass...

I shoot a 120-300 F2.8 Sigma and often (almost always) shoot with a 2x TC So it is effectively 600mm F5.6. The TC degrades IQ a touch so I generally shoot at F8. I have no problems in deep woods with very little light using higher ISO on the D7100...
ISO 1600, F8, 1/500th HH

Golden Crowned Kinglet by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr
ISO 3200 with a Sigma 150-500 @F9 1/250th HH

Doe High ISO 1 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr
ISO 6400 F9 1/250th (OK not in the deep woods but very dark)

Starling ISO 6400 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr

If it was a rainy day, this lens would probably be too slow at a racetrack. It is more of a fair weather lens, I will give you that.

I would say when this lens was designed no one was thinking hockey or indoor equestrian, My 120-300 would work for that but it is more that twice the price of the Tamron..

This lens would be ridiculously silly at and opera or live stage show. Its almost 2 feet long and again NOT designed for that application. Think 70-200 F2.8

I don't really know of anyone thinking this is a one lens solution. It's why we have interchangeable lenses

Again there is no way to take away zoom range to make it more affordable.

 

[Braineack]

I shot some deer on Sunday at f/8, with my 300mm f/5.6, just in spite of Props. My ISO "cranked up" from 900 to 1100.

 

[astroNikon]

I've been contemplating going to 500 or even 600 with this lens.
I need something with AF for wildlife to replace my coffeecan 500mm Nikon Reflex - it's served it's purpose. Plus a few other things that I can sell to make the price more bearable. On a 1.5x crop, this should be an incredible lens. The aperture doesn't bug me .. the d7000 and d600 are great with their ISO.