Hi all,
migratory birds season is coming soon, plenty of birds migrating to Europe from Africa pass by Lebanon.
unfortunately plenty of dirty poachers commit massacres and I really intend to do something about it
So I am considering doing some birding and publish the pictures as widely as I can, giving pictures to ecological local NGO to help them.
Would Tamron 150-600 on 7D2 be the ideal lens for that ????
my other question
I already own Canon 70-300 IS which is pretty decent, would it be enough for the job ??? especially I find it hard to justify getting a lens to use for just 2 weeks
Absolutely Toni!!!.....
...I love this lens as is well known here......it has the lot at an affordable price!
This lens never made it to a major review site.......so permit me to give my review here!
The question everybody wants to know is: is it sharp at the long end?......well most tele-zooms suffer to some extent, but the G2 holds it's own very well at 600mm.........better than the G1 version.
What does that mean? If the air is clear and stable you "will get good sharp images" at 600mm, this year with the still on going heat wave (forecast for 30°C again here today) makes things difficult.......in the end I've found air quality to be the limiting factor not the lens, I get less good results with the Nikkor AF-S 500mm ED F4D!
If I can, I shoot at F8, very sharp, F7.1 is sharp....F6.3 is decent. At all other FLs and apertures it's just sharp sharp sharp!
Remove the tripod foot and it weighs a well balanced moderate 1.9 Kgs, focus is fast and more importantly very very accurate......mine just doesn't miss at any FLs......VC is good if a little jerky at 600mm.....but it works well enough.
Only mode 1 stabilises the view finder, mode 2 is for panning, which seems to work fine...mode 3 doesn't seem to improve anything, no one seems to understand it. I don't use VC at shutter speeds of more than 1/350 sec at 600mm.
It has a mostly metal exterior which seems solid compared with the G1 plastic version, so nice.
The bonus is MFD is 2.2 mts, we are getting towards macro here (1:35 I think) and there's no loss in IQ either.
Arca swiss tripod foot, weather sealing (no dust after two years), flourine coated front element, flare is well controlled, 3 position distance limiter. The zoom has a push pull lock for "all focal lengths" plus the 150mm slide switch lock
I purchased the USB dock....this allows 4 focal lengths to be calibrated at 3 distances, (I didn't need to) and various changes to focus limiting and FW updates. I never use it!
All in all, it's a great bargain lens, Tamron is becoming known for having quickly updated their already good glass with the G2 versions and with this one they gave all that was a shortfall of the original version.
I had it for two years now and it's never put a foot wrong, it's my go to lens for 90% of my shooting.....I don't think I could breathe without it!
Am I biased? Not at all, I just tell it like it is!
I had purchased the Sigma sport, unfortunately it was horribly de-centered, JoJu claimed it to be maybe a little sharper, maybe, my copy was a dud so I cannot say otherwise, sufficient to say that it's much heavier, with most of the weight at the front end including the heavy metal lens-hood, it was just too cumbersome to be hand-holdable for any length of time.
Don't be tempted by the cheaper G1.....It's dust sucker with unpleasant bokeh and the AF keeps stopping, requiring lens removal to restore it, after a year I could no longer get sharp images, something (wear?).......it just couldn't take heavy usage.
IMHO. Your 7D MKII will be the ideal companion for it Toni!
Most of the shots on my Flickr site are taken with it:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/
After reading your reply I contacted seller, he even agreed on exchanging with my Tokina 16-28f2.8 I practically never used.. Will meet seller tomorrow if everything is fine migratory birds season this year will be very interesting ?
One more question, I am a little harsh on my lenses and some of them needed servicing for wobbling because of broken or loose screws, is this one sturdy enough???
I don't cosset my lenses and often drag them through bushes backwards....however in the lens world check you're not getting a dud, ie is it well centred and does it hit the spot with AF?........
.......but that goes for any optic......
...check it out!
Hi Toni,
i´ve had the same thoughts about a tele-zoom like you. I have had a Canon 100-400 IS which had beed quite good - but only up to 400mm. Converters 1,4 or 2x will slow down AF (2x = no AF) and the optical results have been cruely... so i have decided to upgrade....
First of all: a Canon 300mm f 2.8 which is brilliant sharp and has a good weight. In combination with full-frame and converters it goes up to 600mm. I´ve tested it with a 5DMK3 - good sharp Images with a lost of sharpness to the edges and an AF-Speed which will be good enough for a visit at the zoo - but not fast enough for birds...
This combination has had "budgetary ulterior Motive" cause this lens can be bought for about 1000€ (w/o IS) and the converters are already my own.
Second has been the comparison of the Sigma 150-600 C or the Tamron G2. Next has been reading and reading with compromising Charts and technical issues. The interesting Zone is from 400mm up to 600mm.
Before that i´ve bought the 70-200mm tamron G2 lens with the dock. A really good optical "block"; the Software for corrections is quite pretty too.
I have decided to buy the Sigma lens. But why? One reason was the better Image Quality at 600mm. I know, you can get a "monday model" in both cases. And both companies are well known for centering Problems...
The main reason has been that sigma offers more possibilities for free user adjustments called C1 and C2. And here is a real improvement cause you can set IS-mode and AF-Speed in combination with a range Limit. This will help you to find the birds... and use only stabilizing at the "shot Moment".
So i hope this helps for your decision...
Tom
(09-12-2018, 08:49 AM)Tomtom Wrote: ....
I have decided to buy the Sigma lens. But why? One reason was the better Image Quality at 600mm. I know, you can get a "monday model" in both cases. And both companies are well known for centering Problems...
The main reason has been that sigma offers more possibilities for free user adjustments called C1 and C2. And here is a real improvement cause you can set IS-mode and AF-Speed in combination with a range Limit. This will help you to find the birds... and use only stabilizing at the "shot Moment".
So i hope this helps for your decision...
Tom
Centerring problems are not exclusively attached to Sigma or Tamron, just saying
That the Sigma Contemporary @ 600mm should be sharper than the G2 of Tamron is new to me and I'd like to see proof of that. That the Sports version is a tad sharper in the center, I can believe, because I had that and exchanged it for the Tamron. That one has a couple of benefits worth to mention, such as - a much better foot/collar than the Sigmas which is detachable. For the Sports version there's a better foot available, longer and already Arca-Swiss profile, but it's expensive. For the contemporary version, the foot is rather short.
- A clutch for the FL only has Tamron. Sigma's sport version has some fixed positions
- I had less troubles to adjust the Tamron to the D850 than I had with the Sigma adjusting it to the (at the time) D810.
Don't get me wrong, in general I'm a very happy Sigma lens user, but Tamron to me appears to be better in the tele range.
Very nice, DanielStone. Have a cookie.
Is that the new advertisment for Nike jumpers? Can I get them in Nikon yellow?
"That the Sigma Contemporary @ 600mm should be sharper than the G2 of Tamron is new to me and I'd like to see proof of that".
Yeah, fake news.....sorry, it just plain isn't!
Don't be confused by mixing up the G1 version with the G2, the Sigma C did however have better sharpness wide open than the G1 @600mm, stopped down the G1 took the lead again.......
........the G2 changed all that and beats the C in all areas!
Just met the seller, it's a beaten up G1 without the hood, didn't bother testing or discussing with him,
|