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

[lambertpix]

You guys are killin' me with this thread. I thought I'd just about talked myself into staying put with my current lens lineup for a while, but I keep thinking about haulin' this bad boy out to the race track...maybe an air show or two......

I think I need an intervention.

 

[Propsguy]

I generally get all twitchy inside if I set my ISO above 800... My D700 gets noisy above that, and my D7000 doesn't do very well above 1250 (to my eye)... I have a select few photos at around ISO 2000 that I can live with, but I find any amount of noise annoying in my photos (probably because most of my work is highly controlled studio work that takes weeks of preparation) . I didn't really have this problem with film... something about knowing that ISO 1600 film would have grain to it gave it license to have that look, but in this digital age, any of my photos that are noisy are put into the discard pile immediately.

 

[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?

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

Very impressive noise levels at the given ISO... I haven't been able to produce those kind of results with either of my cameras without a ton of post processing, and even then, not as clean as these....

 

[annamaria]

Is it compatible for the Nikon D5100?

 

[ruifo]

Is it compatible for the Nikon D5100?

Yes, but the Nikon version will be released after March.

 

[runnah]

This has been added to my BH wish list!

 

[coastalconn]

I generally get all twitchy inside if I set my ISO above 800... My D700 gets noisy above that, and my D7000 doesn't do very well above 1250 (to my eye)... I have a select few photos at around ISO 2000 that I can live with, but I find any amount of noise annoying in my photos (probably because most of my work is highly controlled studio work that takes weeks of preparation) . I didn't really have this problem with film... something about knowing that ISO 1600 film would have grain to it gave it license to have that look, but in this digital age, any of my photos that are noisy are put into the discard pile immediately.

If you are shooting in a studio I would think you would mostly be shooting at base ISO with strobes? I don't know I'm purely a wildlife guy, so I'm more about natural light.. With the D7100 with good exposure and a touch of NR the images clean up really well..
This chickadee was shot at ISO 2200 with my 120-300 with a 2x TC at F6.3 1/320th

Chickadee in the snow by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr
No NR default sharpening in LR5. I hope the 150-600 is this sharp as you can see a 100% crop is massive on a D7100...

 

[Radical]

Well I ordered the Tamron 150-600mm Sunday and hope it turns out alright. I have to go through hip surgery on the 17th. so I won't be able to use it until March I think.

 

[Radical]

Hey coastalconn, didn't you used to shoot a Tamron lens a while back?

 

[coastalconn]

Hey coastalconn, didn't you used to shoot a Tamron lens a while back?

You mean the 200-500 that everyone proclaimed as crap? Yup, sure did, it won POTY last year with my Osprey shot, and got me into the top 100 in the Audubon magazine in 2012 and 2013 I always thought it was very good for what it was. That's why I think the new one will be pretty awesome sense everything about it is supposed to be better. I have seen many sample shots with bad results, but there seems to be "user error"...
Here's one from the ol' Tamron 200-500.. Seemed pretty sharp to me, even wide open when you filled the frame..
Sorry to all the TPF bunny lovers

Red Tail Hawk Vs The Bunny 5 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr

 

[Radical]

Oh man! I can't wait!

 

[Tailgunner]

Hey coastalconn, didn't you used to shoot a Tamron lens a while back?

You mean the 200-500 that everyone proclaimed as crap? Yup, sure did, it won POTY last year with my Osprey shot, and got me into the top 100 in the Audubon magazine in 2012 and 2013 I always thought it was very good for what it was. That's why I think the new one will be pretty awesome sense everything about it is supposed to be better. I have seen many sample shots with bad results, but there seems to be "user error"...
Here's one from the ol' Tamron 200-500.. Seemed pretty sharp to me, even wide open when you filled the frame..
Sorry to all the TPF bunny lovers

Red Tail Hawk Vs The Bunny 5 by krisinct- Thanks for 1 Million + views!, on Flickr

Oh WOW, Cool Photo Coastalconn!

 

[ruifo]

Very nice, Coastalconn.

 

[coastalconn]

Oh WOW, Cool Photo Coastalconn!

Very nice, Coastalconn.

Thanks, it was probably one of the coolest things I have observed in my wildlife journey. Saw the kill and spent 30 minutes with this hawk about 10 feet away, laying on a frozen rocky beach last winter. The rest of the set is here if you have never seen it... RT Hawk vs The Bunny - a set on Flickr

 

[astroNikon]

Ugh
poor bunny