Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di USD - Birding

Can't agree there Wez, the 300 PF is superb but of course doesn't cover the 150-600/200-500 range. :)

It is superb and I can see a difference. I just mention it to Gil as a couple of people I've spoken to went out and bought prime lenses and were unhappy with the (slight) jump in IQ. One of them was a crap photographer though lol
 
I have to say, I can't see any noticable improvement in IQ with these lenses :eek: - the only lenses I can detect a considerable improvement in the images uploaded on flickr are the Sigma 150-600mm Sport, and the Nikon 500mm f4
 
It is superb and I can see a difference. I just mention it to Gil as a couple of people I've spoken to went out and bought prime lenses and were unhappy with the (slight) jump in IQ. One of them was a crap photographer though lol

I think for my skill level I have better equipment than I deserve, so I don't think I'll be changing my equipment anytime soon. I do like looking at other peoples work though and what they use. I think I need to get out with some more of you guys, because some of things I learnt from Bobsyeruncle have really made a noticeable difference to the shots I've taken this week. Like shooting at f8 to get more of the bird sharp and in focus, and understanding and altering the metering in ISO Auto mode.
 
Last edited:
The trick is to definitely stay with the gear you've got. We all get gear lust and, most of the time, it's unwarranted!

I like your photo's (y)

I don't think it helps looking at Flickr and seeing what some lenses can do, from a variety of different people. There are too many factors involved like PP skills, hand-held vs tripod shooting, using some nice early morning-late evening light vs harsh mid-day sun.

I definitely found with my D500 and Tamron 150-600mm combo, that I had to stay at 500mm and f8 or f9 for maximum sharpness. But, for wildlife, that isn't always doable so the prime lenses really come into their own when shooting wide open (y)
 
Well, after a couple of months with the D500, I'm really impressed with what I've been able to do with the Tamron 150-600 compared to with what I was able to achieve with the Sony and the adapted Sony A Fit version of the same lens. I'm finding that ISO is much closer to 100 at equivalent shutter speeds and I'm able to shoot at 1/1250 which before would result in ridiculously high ISO even in good light. I now realise the importance of the outer focus points and being able to select them. Snerkler had quite rightly explained that this was not possible with this combo and when filling the frame with a larger bird I'm finding it more important to be able to focus on the eye further up on the frame.

I'm wondering what the next step would be in terms of a better lens. I'm probably not going to be changing anytime soon, but it's worth while asking what people think would be the next lens I should try. Would the Nikon 200-500 be a good idea, is the fact that it's a native lens make for faster AF and also a complete flexibility to select the focus point knowing that they all work. Or would the next step be the Sigma Sport (a bit heavy I've heard), the newer Tamron (has anybody tried all of the focus points with this lens), or even an older or shorter prime?
@tom24 has a D500, and changed from the Tamron 150-600 to the Nikon 200-500mm.
He will hopefully be along soon to tell you his thoughts....:)
 
Well here's one from the MK1 Tamron 150-600 with my D500 @ ISO 8000 @ 600mm and f7.1

Plenty enough detail for me.

 
and one at ISO 12,800 on the D500 again @ 600mm

 
and one at ISO 12,800 on the D500 again @ 600mm


Fantastic detail at such high ISO. What do you do for noise reduction as I can't see any noise :).
 
@tom24 has a D500, and changed from the Tamron 150-600 to the Nikon 200-500mm.
He will hopefully be along soon to tell you his thoughts....:)

Like Wez said, I was using the Tamron at 500-550mm anyway and a cracking lens it was.
I moved to the Nikon 200-500mm because I (a) wanted a Nikon (b) wanted the constant f5.6 (c) noted what some local birders had opted for.
There really isn't much between image quality, by far the best way to improve that is by using a tripod. I do and a mono pod.
It's not any faster auto focus either.I moved 'cos of want not actual need.
 
Like Wez said, I was using the Tamron at 500-550mm anyway and a cracking lens it was.
I moved to the Nikon 200-500mm because I (a) wanted a Nikon (b) wanted the constant f5.6 (c) noted what some local birders had opted for.
There really isn't much between image quality, by far the best way to improve that is by using a tripod. I do and a mono pod.
It's not any faster auto focus either.I moved 'cos of want not actual need.

How about being able to get a sucessfull lock when moving the focus spot. Can you move it to the extreme corners and get good results in AFC?
 
Fantastic detail at such high ISO. What do you do for noise reduction as I can't see any noise :).

Thanks, the only two plug ins I really use are Topaz De-Noise 5 for NR and Topaz InFocus for sharpening. Always seems to do a really good job for me.
 
Thanks, the only two plug ins I really use are Topaz De-Noise 5 for NR and Topaz InFocus for sharpening. Always seems to do a really good job for me.

I've always struggled with selecting the subject in Photoshop, even with the intelligent select. Do you still have to select the subject from the background when using these plugins? Do you spend quite some time getting it right, or is it quite an easy process to get the plugins to do their magic?
 
I usually use layers making a duplicate of the background layer, perform NR on the copy layer as needed (say for the background), then use layer masks to paint out the subject (the Jay in these images), to let the original image come though, and repeat if necessary using lower NR values for the bird itself and again, using a layer mask to apply the latest NR layer to just the bird. I works really well, and only takes a few minutes using a feathered brush.

TBH, that's only because I'm quite anal about these things, but you can let Topaz De-Noise just do it's thing and it's quite intelligent and gives pretty good results without bothering with layer masks at all.
 
I usually use layers making a duplicate of the background layer, perform NR on the copy layer as needed (say for the background), then use layer masks to paint out the subject (the Jay in these images), to let the original image come though, and repeat if necessary using lower NR values for the bird itself and again, using a layer mask to apply the latest NR layer to just the bird. I works really well, and only takes a few minutes using a feathered brush.

TBH, that's only because I'm quite anal about these things, but you can let Topaz De-Noise just do it's thing and it's quite intelligent and gives pretty good results without bothering with layer masks at all.

Thanks for the tips, I've been experimenting with Photoshop and Topaz De-noise and getting better results than using Lightroom for NR. I've been getting better at selecting the subject and creating layers which I struggled with before. I guess it becomes harder to select the subject when there's poor contrast between subject and background.
 
Back
Top