Tamron 150-600 G2

[PaulWog]

Plans for something else.

So what does the post have to do with the Tamron?

 

[Peeb73 1]

Want

 

[astroNikon]

The only thing that I do not like about the current Tamron is shooting at f/8. Luckily my camera bodies don't have an issue with that.

I see quite a reduction in detail at f/6.3, so I always shoot it at f/8. Though it is nicer than the Sigma 150-500 Bigma I had.

I've had a 300/4 and 400/5.6 and a 500 Reflex and I figured unless I put a ton of $$$ it's not going to get much better. I figured I'll upgrade my lens after I buy a kayak (which isn't going to happen any time soon).

 

[beagle100]

The only thing that I do not like about the current Tamron is shooting at f/8. Luckily my camera bodies don't have an issue with that.

I see quite a reduction in detail at f/6.3, so I always shoot it at f/8. Though it is nicer than the Sigma 150-500 Bigma I had.

I've had a 300/4 and 400/5.6 and a 500 Reflex and I figured unless I put a ton of $$$ it's not going to get much better. I figured I'll upgrade my lens after I buy a kayak (which isn't going to happen any time soon).

you have to shoot at f8 ?
I'm shooting at f5.6 with my twenty year old 100-400 ... seems good enough. But then I'm also shooting with an old camera so what do I know
Untitled by PhotosCW, on Flickr

 

[astroNikon]

The only thing that I do not like about the current Tamron is shooting at f/8. Luckily my camera bodies don't have an issue with that.

I see quite a reduction in detail at f/6.3, so I always shoot it at f/8. Though it is nicer than the Sigma 150-500 Bigma I had.

I've had a 300/4 and 400/5.6 and a 500 Reflex and I figured unless I put a ton of $$$ it's not going to get much better. I figured I'll upgrade my lens after I buy a kayak (which isn't going to happen any time soon).

you have to shoot at f8 ?
I'm shooting at f5.6 with my twenty year old 100-400 ... seems good enough. But then I'm also shooting with an old camera so what do I know

400mm @ f5.6

I had a 400/5.6 and I shot at 5.6.
But the Tamron, B(S)igma, etc are all their sharpest at f/8 throughout the range. Noticeably sharper.

 

[beagle100]

The only thing that I do not like about the current Tamron is shooting at f/8. Luckily my camera bodies don't have an issue with that.

I see quite a reduction in detail at f/6.3, so I always shoot it at f/8. Though it is nicer than the Sigma 150-500 Bigma I had.

I've had a 300/4 and 400/5.6 and a 500 Reflex and I figured unless I put a ton of $$$ it's not going to get much better. I figured I'll upgrade my lens after I buy a kayak (which isn't going to happen any time soon).

you have to shoot at f8 ?
I'm shooting at f5.6 with my twenty year old 100-400 ... seems good enough. But then I'm also shooting with an old camera so what do I know

I had a 400/5.6 and I shot at 5.6.
But the Tamron, B(S)igma, etc are all their sharpest at f/8 throughout the range. Noticeably sharper.

I only go to f6.3 when I need more "DOF"
maybe I should try the smaller apertures ... or ditch the 20 year old lens (even though the pics seem OK) and go modern

 

[coastalconn]

Only going by their full size images which they provided at the bottom of their page, it seems like sharpness isn't hugely going up.

Hard to tell. ISO 1250 in the Lion, looks like it was taken with a Canon
If they had only hired me for there sample pics...m

I just Sold my Sigma 150-600mm C yesterday,next.

What are you switching to Dave?

The only thing that I do not like about the current Tamron is shooting at f/8. Luckily my camera bodies don't have an issue with that.

I see quite a reduction in detail at f/6.3, so I always shoot it at f/8. Though it is nicer than the Sigma 150-500 Bigma I had.

I've had a 300/4 and 400/5.6 and a 500 Reflex and I figured unless I put a ton of $$$ it's not going to get much better. I figured I'll upgrade my lens after I buy a kayak (which isn't going to happen any time soon).

you have to shoot at f8 ?
I'm shooting at f5.6 with my twenty year old 100-400 ... seems good enough. But then I'm also shooting with an old camera so what do I know

I had a 400/5.6 and I shot at 5.6.
But the Tamron, B(S)igma, etc are all their sharpest at f/8 throughout the range. Noticeably sharper.

I only go to f6.3 when I need more "DOF"
maybe I should try the smaller apertures ... or ditch the 20 year old lens (even though the pics seem OK) and go modern

Don't see much feather detail in your pic
I cheated and went to your Flickr page, saw you shoot your birds at mostly F7.1 and occasionally f6.3 and F8....

 

[PaulWog]

If only there were a next-generation breakthrough f5.6 constant zooms that reach 800mm, at a weight of 2kg or less, and a price of $2000 or less.

Orrr.....

Affordable primes in the 500, 600, and 800mm categories at f5.6 or f4.

Another Tamron 150-600 with improvements is a great step in the right direction though

 

[DarkShadow]

I want something f/4 so I am looking at the Nikon 300mm f/4 E PF ED VR. I won't have the reach I am use to like with the 150-600 but will enjoy the lighter weight especially with my health issues. I think the Tamron and sigma give a lot of bang for the buck and they are sharp with out a doubt with a good copy but to me living in f/8 all the time kinda of sucks especially walking around in dimly light wooded areas.JMHO.

This New Tamron looks good though on paper but still f in and 8 in again.

 

[astroNikon]

I want something f/4 so I am looking at the Nikon 300mm f/4 E PF ED VR. I won't have the reach I am use to like with the 150-600 but will enjoy the lighter weight especially with my health issues. I think the Tamron and sigma give a lot of bang for the buck and they are sharp with out a doubt with a good copy but to me living in f/8 all the time kinda of sucks especially walking around in dimly light wooded areas.JMHO.

This New Tamron looks good though on paper but still f in and 8 in again.

Have you thought of getting a d600 to improve low light performance? I went from the d7000 to d600 and was blown away by its low light ability. The f/8 doesn't bug me much due to full frame ability.

 

[DarkShadow]

The D7200 is real good at high Iso with a far superior focusing then a D600 and focuses real well in very low light for my night shooting. If I was going to go full frame I rather have the D750 for wildlife shooting. That being said I rather have the lighter weight glass,better consistency with bokeh or should be anyways and know I can shoot at a constant f/4 and use an optional TC if needed with the 300 PF VR. I have read some problems with the VR but supposedly a firmware update has corrected this. Its an expensive piece of glass so going to sit tight a bit to see if anything else pops up that might be a better option that don't cost more then my car or weight 8 pounds.

 

[ruifo]

Some specs compared

 

[beagle100]

Only going by their full size images which they provided at the bottom of their page, it seems like sharpness isn't hugely going up.

Hard to tell. ISO 1250 in the Lion, looks like it was taken with a Canon
If they had only hired me for there sample pics...m

I just Sold my Sigma 150-600mm C yesterday,next.

What are you switching to Dave?

The only thing that I do not like about the current Tamron is shooting at f/8. Luckily my camera bodies don't have an issue with that.

I see quite a reduction in detail at f/6.3, so I always shoot it at f/8. Though it is nicer than the Sigma 150-500 Bigma I had.

I've had a 300/4 and 400/5.6 and a 500 Reflex and I figured unless I put a ton of $$$ it's not going to get much better. I figured I'll upgrade my lens after I buy a kayak (which isn't going to happen any time soon).

you have to shoot at f8 ?
I'm shooting at f5.6 with my twenty year old 100-400 ... seems good enough. But then I'm also shooting with an old camera so what do I know

I had a 400/5.6 and I shot at 5.6.
r.

I only go to f6.3 when I need more "DOF"
maybe I should try the smaller apertures ... or ditch the 20 year old lens (even though the pics seem OK) and go modern

Don't see much feather detail in your pic
I cheated and went to your Flickr page, saw you shoot your birds at mostly F7.1 and occasionally f6.3 and F8....

like I said, it's about the DOF

I'll even go to f4.5 ... or even f4...... crazy!

 

[DMammoser]

I've had the original version of this lens since it first came out and love it and use it all the time and YES it is sharp at 600mm and wide open when used properly. Here is a thread from another forum that I wrote with sample images-
NatureScapes.net Forums • View topic - Sharp at all Focal Lengths - Tamron 150-600mm Di VC PZD Lens

Still, I can't wait to try out this new version. The closer focus distance and the Arca Swiss mount lens collar foot are things REAL photographers need.

 

[PaulWog]

I've had the original version of this lens since it first came out and love it and use it all the time and YES it is sharp at 600mm and wide open when used properly. Here is a thread from another forum that I wrote with sample images-
NatureScapes.net Forums • View topic - Sharp at all Focal Lengths - Tamron 150-600mm Di VC PZD Lens

Still, I can't wait to try out this new version. The closer focus distance and the Arca Swiss mount lens collar foot are things REAL photographers need.

"Sharp" is very subjective.

Everyone uses that word to describe every lens they own.