Tamron SP 150-600mm F5-6.3 DI IF VC USD

jerry12953 said:
Thanks, Richard.

Hope you don't mind me posting a sample of the strange out-of-focus backgrounds which I seem to be getting on a lot of shots. What do think?

Would you describe it is "bokeh"?

View attachment 12660
Click to expand...

I would guess from that shot there's got to be a few twigs or something between the camera and subject. They're too far out of focus to see, but they're being picked up in the background bokeh/blur. Easy to test - focus on a subject with some well out of focus background, then hold a pencil in front of the lens. You'll not see the pencil, but there will be a pattern in the background bokeh that lines up with it.

Funny looking magpie :D
 
i did a test on this lens against my 400mm f5.6 and 1.4tc and borrowed the 150-600 tammy from a friend,change that to we swopped lenses for the day together .my thoughts were it was a good lens if you didn't already own a canon L lens or were restricted by not having f8 capability on a/f .the tammy was o.k at around 75% of the time and would be a good purchase if you want that extra reach and can't obtain it any other way .after my days trial i very quickly went off the boil and decided it wasn't in my own interests to buy one .
to sum up if your using a 1.6 crop camera and on limited funds its a good deal .if you are on a 1.3 crop or full frame and have or can afford a longer lens or indeed use a t.c at f8 then its not really viable
 
Yes, in that particular one there probabaly is some out-of-focus foreground put there (on purpose, I might add!) in order to soften the image.
But there are just too many like this without anything in the foreground to explain it. I'll post another (see below). I don't think there's any foreground in it - all background as far as I can remember. I seem to remember reading something about it on the net but it would take forever to find it again.......






View attachment 12663

.
 
Last edited:
fracster said:
That is not the point I'm worried about Phil. I am
concerned that the af will not be up to speed, if that is the case then I'm sure i could, as the prime will nail he subject whilst the zoom is still hunting. From a wildlife point of view. That said, i hope i am wrong and this lens is the canines accroutrements
Click to expand...
Of course it won't, it's an f6.3 zoom lens. In good conditions the AF will be fine, like most other slow lenses in good conditions.
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
Of course it won't, it's an f6.3 lens. In good conditions the AF will be fine, like most other slow lenses in good conditions.
Click to expand...
I know that for Christs sake, stop being so bloody patronising.

It depends on how much slower the AF is,if it similar to my 300-800 Sigma, then it is not the lens for me. If it is better,then it may well be worth serious consideration.
 
fracster said:
I know that for Christs sake, stop being so bloody patronising.

It depends on how much slower the AF is,if it similar to my 300-800 Sigma, then it is not the lens for me. If it is better,then it may well be worth serious consideration.
Click to expand...
It only sounds patronising because you're making a silly comparison with the AF speed...

I don't think it will be "great" or excel in anything but will probably (now pr once tamron sort the QC issues?) Be very good in most of it's departments.

Just my experienced guess...
 
jerry12953 said:
I'll try that test you're suggesting, Richard. I didn't quite understand what you were getting at initially. I suppose its possible there were some OOF foreground twigs (left there for entirely artistic purposes I might add ) but I just don't remember.
Click to expand...

That second shot is less easy, if there's nothing in the foreground. Dunno really, could actually be a weird background, or something about the lens, or a bit of both.

You could maybe identify it as a lens characteristic by comparing directly against another lens. Assuming you don't have another 600mm, just use your longest other and enlarge to match - should be good enough to see if they're significantly difference.

You don't have a filter on the Tamron do you? That's a common cause of funny backgrounds with long lenses.
 
fracster said:
I know that for Christs sake, stop being so bloody patronising.

It depends on how much slower the AF is,if it similar to my 300-800 Sigma, then it is not the lens for me. If it is better,then it may well be worth serious consideration.
Click to expand...

The actual AF mech on the Tamron 150-600 is very fast - that is certainly not a problem. Good AF is a game of two halves though, as the lens only responds to instructions from the camera, but the camera can only work with the image it receives, which is where f/6.3 comes in (and shooting conditions).
 
im going to presume the f6.3 at 600mm (thus less dof) isnt too terrible, but if you have a 300-800 sigma which is ment to be extremely good? why would you want a cheaper lens with similer range
 
jerry12953 said:
Now that could be it. I may well have had a (good quality) UV on it - despite your and others' advice. Another thing to test for!
Click to expand...

LOL Fancy a bet?
 
My findings from today: lens will achieve AF quickly in bright conditions. When it was around 15:00 today (overcast in Minsmere) the lens started to struggle. When I say struggle, I mean STRUGGLE. When I pointed at stationary bird and pressed AF button, it took between half to one second for the AF to actually move and start hunting for the subject.
I'm considering another visit to Tamron service!
 
maybe its time to accept its limitations
 
benj1867 said:
maybe its time to accept its limitations
Click to expand...

Gradually coming to this conclusion ... it's a 600mm lens at under a grand!
We would all love a stunning 600mm at this price but what are the chances of that happening?
To me it seems like a good economical option in excellent light but that's where its excellence ends.
 
lol, was hoping it was a 100-400 buster but doesnt look like it. excellent for the money mind
 
Just spoken to Tamron UK re availability. (Nikon fit) A few have already been sold in the UK, but they are still waiting for further supplies coming through from Tamron.

Tamron UK simply don't know when to expect the next shipment & it doesn't sound like i'll have one within the next week, but they asked who I'd pre-ordered with & took my number.
Apparently demand has far exceeded their expectations.

As I said & he agreed (the issue has already been brought to Tamron's attention) it's the lack of information that's so frustrating & counter productive.

I'll just wait a couple more weeks, then if it doesn't arrive i'll cancel & look at the alternatives. I'm not prepared to miss what Summer we get, without a longer lens.
 
Haha, from HK, can't see anyone paying that price, Mike.
 
I have read on a couple of different forums that Tamron have a 'fix for AF issues'. Apparently you need to send the Lens to Tamron and there is a 3 day turnaround - user pays the postage to Tamron and Tamron pay the postage back to you. Here is a quote I saw on one forum:
"This firmware update is intended for all those buyers of this lens that had them shipped before the February 8th recall of the Canon mount lens. Any lenses that shipped after April 20th should already have the update installed. All Nikon mounts also have the firmware update already so you can save yourself the shipping costs."
Not sure about lenses shipped between these dates:confused: but it could mean they may or may not have already been done.
Here is another quote "called Tamron and was told that the lens fix was a re-chip and it fixed various other problems. He was told that weather or not he was experiencing a problem it should be done"

Note everything I have seen on this 'fix' is on the other side of the pond - not seen anything from user in Europe about it.
 
Last edited:
Roy, do you have a link to those quotes please? I'd like to forward them to Tamron UK.
 
HoppyUK said:
Roy, do you have a link to those quotes please? I'd like to forward them to Tamron UK.
Click to expand...
HERE is one link, if you read through the thread you will see a few instances where the users have been told by Tamron about the Fix. There are also references to it HERE (near the bottom of the thread). I have also see mentions of the fix on a Flickr discussion.
 
Nick, yes it could be - I've got one or two things to test for though....

Including the UV filter hypothesis mentioned above!


Roy C said:
I have read on a couple of different forums that Tamron have a 'fix for AF issues'. Apparently you need to send the Lens to Tamron and there is a 3 day turnaround - user pays the postage to Tamron and Tamron pay the postage back to you. Here is a quote I saw on one forum:
"This firmware update is intended for all those buyers of this lens that had them shipped before the February 8th recall of the Canon mount lens. Any lenses that shipped after April 20th should already have the update installed. All Nikon mounts also have the firmware update already so you can save yourself the shipping costs."
Not sure about lenses shipped between these dates:confused: but it could mean they may or may not have already been done.
Here is another quote "called Tamron and was told that the lens fix was a re-chip and it fixed various other problems. He was told that weather or not he was experiencing a problem it should be done"

Note everything I have seen on this 'fix' is on the other side of the pond - not seen anything from user in Europe about it.
Click to expand...


Interesting that in this quote they actually mention a "recall". It must be the first time I've heard the word mentioned. I must check when I bought mine but it was certainly well before April 20th, and therefore one of the pre-recall batch.
 
jerry12953 said:
Interesting that in this quote they actually mention a "recall". It must be the first time I've heard the word mentioned. I must check when I bought mine but it was certainly well before April 20th, and therefore one of the pre-recall batch.
Click to expand...
I am fairly sure there will not be a 'recall' as such Jerry - from what I can tell the onus is on you to contact Tamron and sent your lens in if you have AF problems.
 
Roy C said:
I am fairly sure there will not be a 'recall' as such Jerry - from what I can tell the onus is on you to contact Tamron and sent your lens in if you have AF problems.
Click to expand...


Perhaps they recalled stock from dealers when it became apparent there was a problem?

I must say, I'm getting some great results from mine. I haven't tried birds in flight though.......

Thanks for posting info. about the fix.
 
Forgetting any AF issues for the moment - for any of you guys who have tried the Tammy and also used a Canon 'L' Prime like the 400/5.6 how do you find the IQ for birds and in particular the fine detail?
Looking at reviews like the lens comparisons on 'the-digital-picture' the Tammy comes out well at 600mm when stopped down to f8 and I have seen some sharp close-up shots taken with the Tammy but the detail on a birds feathers does not seem to have the fine detail compared with what I have gotten with a few Canon prime lenses (400/5.6 (at 560mm ) and 300/2.8 IS (at 600mm)
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
Forgetting any AF issues for the moment - for any of you guys who have tried the Tammy and also used a Canon 'L' like the 400/5.6 (or maybe even the 100-400) how do you find the IQ for birds and in particular the fine detail?
Looking at reviews like the lens comparisons on 'the-digital-picture' the Tammy comes out well at 600mm when stopped down to f8 and I have seen some sharp close-up shots taken with the Tammy but the detail on a birds feathers does not seem to have the fine detail compared with what I have gotten with a few Canon lenses.
Click to expand...

I'm getting much better results with mine than with my 100-400, with or without a 1.4x TC. No competition at all.
 
jerry12953 said:
I'm getting much better results with mine than with my 100-400, with or without a 1.4x TC. No competition at all.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that Jerry, I have now edited my original post to say 'Prime' lenses as I have never really liked zoom lenses for birds and have always used Primes (would not say no to the Canon 200-400+tc though!!!).
 
Phil Young said:
Wow... didn't realise it was on the lens comparison tool on TDP.

I'm getting it 100% now. That tool has never done me wrong before.
Click to expand...
It's been up there for well over a month now. It compares well at 600/8 with both the 400/5.6 + 1.4x tc and 300/2.8 IS MkI + 2x tc (MkII) in both centre and mid frame which is what got me interested in the lens. But I am not seeing the fine detail in birds feathers with shots taken with it!!!
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
It's been up there for well over a month now. It compares well at 600/8 with both the 400/5.6 + 1.4x tc and 300/2.8 IS MkI + 2x tc (MkII) in both centre and mid frame which is what got me interested in the lens. But I am not seeing the fine detail in birds feathers with shots taken with it!!!
Click to expand...
It performs well wide open at 600mm and very good at f8 IMO. At f8 600mm this is not as sharp as my old 55-200mm and I wouldn't have had a problem with fine detail on that.
 
Phil Young said:
It performs well wide open at 600mm and very good at f8 IMO. At f8 600mm this is not as sharp as my old 55-200mm and I wouldn't have had a problem with fine detail on that.
Click to expand...
I did not think you had the Tammy yet Phil !!! Looking at TDP comparisons it looks poor at 600/6.3 but a lot better when stopped down to f8 - this is also in-line with just about every review I have seen. BTW I think comparing the Tammy at 600mm with a 55-200 lens is 'apples and oranges'.
 
I guess the real crux question for me is whether a 600mm shot would show microcontrast and fractal detail retention (especially feathers and fur) better than a cropped-from-20MP image from a 400/5.6 on the same sensor. If not appreciably better then for my needs the 400/5.6 is the right choice for a similar price, even though it loses the headline reach. Not to belittle the lens- it seems like a huge bang-for-buck, but I can't help but think the sweet spot is much less forgiving of fast moving subjects in poor British light.
 
Roy C said:
I did not think you had the Tammy yet Phil !!! Looking at TDP comparisons it looks poor at 600/6.3 but a lot better when stopped down to f8 - this is also in-line with just about every review I have seen. BTW I think comparing the Tammy at 600mm with a 55-200 lens is 'apples and oranges'.
Click to expand...
I thought we were still talking about the digital picture comparison tool?

I'm not comparing lenses as much as comparing detail from the test. I'm not sure why that would be unfair???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top