Nice review. Something to consider about the 500mm vs 600mm is that the reach gain is actually quite minimal. I rented the Sony 200-600mm and ended up buying the Tamron 150-500mm because the difference in size of the Sony lens did not justify the extra reach. Also, it’s true that the max aperture on the Tamron lens at 500mm is 6.7, but just zoom out a little to 480mm and it goes to 6.3. As for the noise, I noticed it too but you really have to put your ear close to the lens to hear it. Or maybe I’m just getting old 😂.
No. You are just a normal person. The 200-600 Sony is just crappy to carry and handle. It’s a great lens! But Tamron eats that lens alive with all things considered. If my Tamron broke. I’d buy another one. Easy choice.
I rented the Sigma 150-600 Sports (Cannon EF mount) for an Air show and couldn't believe how big it was. Glad I rented it. I ended up purchasing the Tamron 150-600 because I knew I would rarely take the huge Sigma with me - given it's large size. Ii think the parameters you used to review the lens is better than telling me about corner sharpness and t-stop, etc. Great video.
Another great review. For me as a "senior" photographer size does matter. I rented the 200-600 and while I liked it a lot, it's huge. Would not fit in my bag and was just as heavy as the 150-500. I bought the 150-500 for wildlife photography. Yes it's heavy. And lugging it around on my shoulder for 2-3 hours is a challenge, but if you're going to take wildlife photos.....you need reach. I haven't heard the noises Leigh was discussing. But maybe my hearing isn't what it used to be ;). Image quality is really good. In the center just as good as the 200-600 and a notch below the 100-400 GM. It's also cheaper. $1,000 less than the 100-400 and $600 less than the 200-600. Finally, it's fits in my bag. Thanks for the review Leigh.
For me, I think the most insightful comment I've heard across many photography channels is the one you made about useability. If a lens isn't relatively easy to carry it doesn't make it out with me very often; it's relegated to a couple carefully planned outings a year. If I have to pixel peep to determine that the convenient-to-carry (not best but still pretty good) lens is a little soft in the corners, isn't the fastest glass, or maybe doesn't have the creamiest of bokeh, it's good enough to carry and use. I believe the vast majority of people you show its photos to will never notice a thing - only the pixel peepers will sneer after enlarging 100 percent. I've been debating buying the Z mount version of this lens against the Nikon 180-600 and am convinced that I am far more likely to carry and use the smaller and lighter Tamron than the larger and technically better Nikon; the extra 100mm reach of the Nikon is great but doesn't help if I'm not carrying it.
Thanks for this review! I value convenience over tech specs, this lense is perfect for my work: I have the reach that I need with 500mm and I have the lightest setup possible to be able to not get tired after long hours of shooting.
That is seriously compact for a 500mm reach. Finally a FF lens that you can actually consider taking on a hike. I would love to have something like this. Because of the size and weight the other options are a no go for me. When I hike, I like to enjoy the hike, not feel like a mover. This looks like a winner.
I agree with everything Leigh says here regarding usability. With that in mind, I would boldly suggest anyone shooting casually consider the Sony 70-350G APS-C lens for reach. With effective range between 105-525mm on APS-C bodies or full frame in crop mode, it’s portable and has relatively big aperture. As for resolution loss in crop mode - with new AI enhancement such as Gigapixel or Adobe Super Resolution plugins, it shouldn’t be a problem any more for casual shooters.
I have watched a dozen vids on this lens..I have been on the fence Till you sold me… when you watch your video that you just made on this lens watch your eyes very much expression thank you for a good video well explained you hit it on the nail head again you did great job explaining and sharing your thoughts on this lens I am now the new proud owner of this baby.. keep rockin Excelente
Great review, very practically orientated. Don't forget on a Sony >= A7 III with the Tamron 150-500 you only have to press a preassigned custom button, assuming you've set one up, to set that great 24M BSI sensor to APS-C and switch that lens to give you 225-750mm, if you find your struggling for a little reach occassionally.
Hi Leigh, I like your reviews very much .You are so right with your statement that usability is more important than image quality, there are hardly any newer lenses that aren’t at least decently sharp over the frame and have good contrast, flare resistance and quite nice bokeh, so go with the one you like to shoot with. Concerning your question: I just kept my Canon 70-300 IS USM II and use it with an old Canon 700D instead of buying, paying and carrying a super-telephoto lens for the A7 iii … so I have an extremely light and compact combo that reaches 480mm and has insanely fast AF … the Combo is smaller and lighter than the full frame lenses alone and I don’t have to change lenses. If I were more into wildlife photography I‘d possibly think about this Tamron lens … even then I would definitely try my old A5100 with it, that would make for a 750mm FOV, great, but then I‘m no serious pixel-peeper to be honest 😉 What do you think about APS-C or MFT for telephoto? My doctor even went with a super-zoom bridge camera to Africa and returned with stunning photos of cheetah family life!
Just ordered this lens new for equivalent of 1030 dollars. I have good experience with Tamron 100-400 on Nikon, this has great optical quality. I think I'll not be disappointed with 150-500.
Hi, about 2 months ago I bought this lens along with a Sony A7RV camera. Used for bird watching mostly, some landscape stuff, and close up shots of old tractors with rust and stuff like that. The Sony A7RV used with this lens, is it a good combination? Thank you so much. Subscribed! Thanks
When you described this lens as a "light option", I realized we have completely different perspective on lenses. Since you have a broader perspective on lenses as a professional, Tamron 150-500 could be seen as relatively light compared to others of similar specs. But for me, I could not believe how heavy this thing was when I first got it. I've used 70-300 and 100-400 before, and this lens is at least double or triple the weight. When compared to Sigma 100-400 (1130g), Tamron 150-500 (1930g inc. collar) is almost double the weight for 25% gain in reach, which doesn't seem like a very good trade off to me, and I just couldn't imagine myself lugging around that much weight just for a bit more reach.
The real benefit over the 100-400 is the vastly superior AF performance, especially where tracking erratically moving subjects comes into play. Also the weatherproof construction throughout.
This was my first "ultra zoom" telephoto lens. I had been utilizing an adapted Minolta 500mm reflex. I love it's unique boke background effect, but I wanted something a little sharper.
It's a very hard decision. The Sony has ultimate reach, plus telephoto compatibility and maximum frame rate going for it. But damn is it big. Like, I would have buy a new backpack for it. The Tamron is short enough that you can carry it mounted in a bag. Having said that, the minimum focus distance is really, really nice. I do think Tamron missed an opportunity to distinguish themselves. 100-500 range and a 300g less weight would've given it a very, very clear spot in the Sony lens catalogue.
I have the Sigma 100-400 and I love it, but........since the arrival of the Tamron 150-500 and the Sigma 150-600 Sport I wonder if the trade off in focal distance and size/weight is worth it.
Thanks Leigh, Always enjoy your vids and this one was no exception. I’m almost am ready to pull the trigger on this Tamron. Recently got my 35-150mm 2-2.8. Regards Bob C
Excellent review I'm off to Sydney to buy this on Sunday. Trading in a Sigma 150 600 C for Canon and a MC 11 converter. Looking forward to using this on the White Bellied Sea Eagle
Great review. Thank you. I shoot the Sony FE 200-600mm and love the lens in the sunlight. If the Sigma lens were available at the time that I purchased the 200-600, I would have strongly leaned towards saving the $500 for a similarly sized lens (by weight) of similar quality. Although I do like that the Sony internally focuses. It's a great lens until the sun starts to set, your are indoors, or under stadium lights. At which point, I shoot with a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 adapted to Sony, and it works great. If you go into APS-C mode you get to 450mm f4 on that lens if you need some more reach. On the Sony 200-600 I also replaced the lens foot with an Arca Swiss foot. In summary, I have no reason to buy the Sigma already having the Sony 200-600, but would have taken a very hard look at buying the Sigma if it were available earlier.
I may be the first to use this lense on a Sony ZX10E. Besides being an APS-C camera where the lengths run from 225 to 750 what should I remain aware of. I might end up with a full frame 7C someday.
Until recently, I shot Sony. For a Super Telephoto, my 1st option was the 200-600 on an A7iii, but I was planning a trip to Banff Alberta & to be blunt, the 200-600 was simply too big to put in my camera backpack "just in case" I saw something. This led me to the 100-400 and the A7Riii. With that combination, I could crop to give me an image with roughly the same reach and the same resolution as my first set up. I just switched over to Nikon and a Z8. The Z 100-400 S Lens is very expensive and the newly announced Z 180-600 will have the same size & weight issues as the Sony 200-600 did. This Tamron, however is rumoured to be coming in a Z Mount and if it is, this has the potential to be a "Goldilocks" super-tele. My fingers are crossed.
Did you end up getting it now that it's on Nikon Z mount? I've recently switched from Canon to Nikon Z8, and I'm considering this Tamron as my super tele lens too! IF you have got it, what's your experience?
@@KPAki1Ler I ordered it and when it came in, there was a fair bit of "play" between the camera and the lens. I refused to accept it and asked that they return it to Tamron & get me a new one. If it doesn't have any play, then great! If it does, however, then I will cancel the order and probably opt for the Nikkor Z 100-400S.
I have both of Sony’s longer telephoto zooms, to be able to combine those into a single, versatile package is really interesting. Maybe this becomes the travel zoom, especially at the price point b
Hi Leigh, I like the zoom range. Would you use this on a Nikon Z7ii, with the Techart Sony E - Nikon Z Autofocus Adapter (TZE-01)? Would you be worried about any compatibility issues? Should I just wait for the Nikon Z 100-400? I'm not worried about the extra 500mm reach. Thanks, Robert DeVoe-Peterson
Personal preference is key. I hike. I usually want compactness and portability. I only own lenses to 200mm. ( and those can be pretty hefty to hike with)But if I had to carry a monster lens to get the shots I want I would. So I would go with this Tamron but…..Lol…..I’m also an aperture queen. That 6.7 is sort of off putting. Im also a Nikon Z 6ll user so it’s a moot point. But maybe Nikon will come out with something or share their mount with third parties. And thank you for another informative review.
I own the Sony 70-350 and use it on a a6600. I consider to upgrade, the Tamron 150-500 is only 11 mm longer than Sigma 100-400, still much heavier. I am not sure if the Sigma is an upgrade at all.
Are you considering the Sigma 100-400mm or the new Sigma 150-600mm as a replacement for the Sony 70-350mm? I agree that going from 350mm to 400mm on the long end isn't a large improvement in terms of focal length. However, the difference between 350mm to 600mm is much larger.
@@LeighAndRaymond Before Tamron released the 150-500 the Sigma 100-400 looked interesting. Sigma 150-600 is to big. 600 is 900 on APS-C. If I upgrade to full frame an a7R4 will give me 26 mp in APS-C mode. Maybe the Sony 100-400 GM is the best choice.
How are you Leigh? Which telephoto lens is the most suitable and with the largest distance possible for the E-mount APS-C format? I have a Sony a6400 and I’m into bird and nature photography. Greetings from Machupicchu, Cusco, 🇵🇪
If your main consideration is to have the most reach, Sony makes a 600mm f/4 and a 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3, and Sigma recently announced a 150-600mm f/4.5-6.3. I discuss them here: ruclips.net/video/nEC15HWlrBQ/видео.html and ruclips.net/video/5HetVlKOFak/видео.html
Good question - the lens profile corrections in Lightroom took care of any vignetting and distortion. I didn't specifically test for chromatic aberrations but I also didn't run across any in my time with the lens.
hi hope well do u do wildlife and if so what camera and lens do u use i have a nikon z7 with 24-200 but have just recently bought siga 150-600 via adapter but my ultimate lens is the 500mm Pf but thinking of getting a second body for the lens for my wildlife photography but have been recommended sony mirrorless i know theres an adapter which can buy to attach sony E mount lenses like this i hope onto nikon z mount body have you tried this adapter yet or will u be getting one to try it out
Oh my goodness she's so stunning it's hard to focus on discussion. I think it's very telling that User Experience (UX) is at last becoming a priority in camera lenses, like it is in so many other areas of business.
The design of the Tamron lens collar is perfect in terms of the mount as well as how easy it is to remove. Also, it doesn’t leave some odd space that is missing something when you take it off. You wouldn’t be able to notice it is supposed to have one. The Sony, when it’s removed. Looks stupid.
Hmmm...sounds nice. But here is the issue. With the Sony A1 all the 3rd party lenses are getting a hit now. Because they don't support 30fps what is a key point of the A1. I personally would not buy the Tamron because of this reason. The Sony 200-600mm would be the way to go for me as it supports 30fps of my A1.
Help ..help….I got new Sony A6500…for free…..I’m a newbie ….I need a zoom lens cheap ….looking into Sony 55-210mm……since I’m new will that lens reach out to 50-70 yards …..for close up shots …I go to college football and MLB baseball…like to take shots of them on the field…from my seat …I sit close to the field ….my next step will be the tamron 70-300mm …but 400$ plus little out of my range …right now …with not knowing if I even going to like taking pictures…lol…lol…..please help with any info …on that lens …or any other under 250$ that would work ….
![Jack Harlow - Hello Miss Johnson [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q86_nlRoIGw/mqdefault.jpg)
Nice review. Something to consider about the 500mm vs 600mm is that the reach gain is actually quite minimal. I rented the Sony 200-600mm and ended up buying the Tamron 150-500mm because the difference in size of the Sony lens did not justify the extra reach. Also, it’s true that the max aperture on the Tamron lens at 500mm is 6.7, but just zoom out a little to 480mm and it goes to 6.3. As for the noise, I noticed it too but you really have to put your ear close to the lens to hear it. Or maybe I’m just getting old 😂.
No. You are just a normal person. The 200-600 Sony is just crappy to carry and handle. It’s a great lens! But Tamron eats that lens alive with all things considered. If my Tamron broke. I’d buy another one. Easy choice.
@@joshuathomas4934until you buy an a9II or an A1..
I rented the Sigma 150-600 Sports (Cannon EF mount) for an Air show and couldn't believe how big it was. Glad I rented it. I ended up purchasing the Tamron 150-600 because I knew I would rarely take the huge Sigma with me - given it's large size. Ii think the parameters you used to review the lens is better than telling me about corner sharpness and t-stop, etc. Great video.
Another great review. For me as a "senior" photographer size does matter. I rented the 200-600 and while I liked it a lot, it's huge. Would not fit in my bag and was just as heavy as the 150-500. I bought the 150-500 for wildlife photography. Yes it's heavy. And lugging it around on my shoulder for 2-3 hours is a challenge, but if you're going to take wildlife photos.....you need reach. I haven't heard the noises Leigh was discussing. But maybe my hearing isn't what it used to be ;). Image quality is really good. In the center just as good as the 200-600 and a notch below the 100-400 GM. It's also cheaper. $1,000 less than the 100-400 and $600 less than the 200-600. Finally, it's fits in my bag. Thanks for the review Leigh.
For me, I think the most insightful comment I've heard across many photography channels is the one you made about useability. If a lens isn't relatively easy to carry it doesn't make it out with me very often; it's relegated to a couple carefully planned outings a year. If I have to pixel peep to determine that the convenient-to-carry (not best but still pretty good) lens is a little soft in the corners, isn't the fastest glass, or maybe doesn't have the creamiest of bokeh, it's good enough to carry and use. I believe the vast majority of people you show its photos to will never notice a thing - only the pixel peepers will sneer after enlarging 100 percent. I've been debating buying the Z mount version of this lens against the Nikon 180-600 and am convinced that I am far more likely to carry and use the smaller and lighter Tamron than the larger and technically better Nikon; the extra 100mm reach of the Nikon is great but doesn't help if I'm not carrying it.
You nailed it again. Brand name doesn't matter to me. Image quality and usability matter tons. This is an intriguing option.
Thanks for this review! I value convenience over tech specs, this lense is perfect for my work: I have the reach that I need with 500mm and I have the lightest setup possible to be able to not get tired after long hours of shooting.
That is seriously compact for a 500mm reach. Finally a FF lens that you can actually consider taking on a hike. I would love to have something like this. Because of the size and weight the other options are a no go for me. When I hike, I like to enjoy the hike, not feel like a mover. This looks like a winner.
I can’t answer to the final question as Canon & Fuji user but the content of your review is always feeding my thoughts.
I agree with everything Leigh says here regarding usability. With that in mind, I would boldly suggest anyone shooting casually consider the Sony 70-350G APS-C lens for reach. With effective range between 105-525mm on APS-C bodies or full frame in crop mode, it’s portable and has relatively big aperture. As for resolution loss in crop mode - with new AI enhancement such as Gigapixel or Adobe Super Resolution plugins, it shouldn’t be a problem any more for casual shooters.
I have watched a dozen vids on this lens..I have been on the fence Till you sold me…
when you watch your video that you just made on this lens watch your eyes very much expression thank you for a good video well explained you hit it on the nail head again you did great job explaining and sharing your thoughts on this lens I am now the new proud owner of this baby.. keep rockin Excelente
I recently bought the tamron 150-600mm. Wondering now if I should have waited.
Great review, very practically orientated. Don't forget on a Sony >= A7 III with the Tamron 150-500 you only have to press a preassigned custom button, assuming you've set one up, to set that great 24M BSI sensor to APS-C and switch that lens to give you 225-750mm, if you find your struggling for a little reach occassionally.
Hi Leigh, I like your reviews very much .You are so right with your statement that usability is more important than image quality, there are hardly any newer lenses that aren’t at least decently sharp over the frame and have good contrast, flare resistance and quite nice bokeh, so go with the one you like to shoot with.
Concerning your question: I just kept my Canon 70-300 IS USM II and use it with an old Canon 700D instead of buying, paying and carrying a super-telephoto lens for the A7 iii … so I have an extremely light and compact combo that reaches 480mm and has insanely fast AF … the Combo is smaller and lighter than the full frame lenses alone and I don’t have to change lenses.
If I were more into wildlife photography I‘d possibly think about this Tamron lens … even then I would definitely try my old A5100 with it, that would make for a 750mm FOV, great, but then I‘m no serious pixel-peeper to be honest 😉
What do you think about APS-C or MFT for telephoto? My doctor even went with a super-zoom bridge camera to Africa and returned with stunning photos of cheetah family life!
For hiking I carry Sony A7c with Tamron 28-200. Absolutely love the versatility and image quality.
Just ordered this lens new for equivalent of 1030 dollars. I have good experience with Tamron 100-400 on Nikon, this has great optical quality. I think I'll not be disappointed with 150-500.
Hi, about 2 months ago I bought this lens along with a Sony A7RV camera. Used for bird watching mostly, some landscape stuff, and close up shots of old tractors with rust and stuff like that. The Sony A7RV used with this lens, is it a good combination? Thank you so much. Subscribed! Thanks
When you described this lens as a "light option", I realized we have completely different perspective on lenses.
Since you have a broader perspective on lenses as a professional, Tamron 150-500 could be seen as relatively light compared to others of similar specs.
But for me, I could not believe how heavy this thing was when I first got it. I've used 70-300 and 100-400 before, and this lens is at least double or triple the weight. When compared to Sigma 100-400 (1130g), Tamron 150-500 (1930g inc. collar) is almost double the weight for 25% gain in reach, which doesn't seem like a very good trade off to me, and I just couldn't imagine myself lugging around that much weight just for a bit more reach.
The real benefit over the 100-400 is the vastly superior AF performance, especially where tracking erratically moving subjects comes into play. Also the weatherproof construction throughout.
Thanks. Nice video. Do you use Vibration Compensation on a tripod? Some people do!!
i just bougth it. awaiting delivery. it will compliment my other Tamron 35-150mm
How did the Tamron stabilization compare to Sigma? Especially for video?
This was my first "ultra zoom" telephoto lens. I had been utilizing an adapted Minolta 500mm reflex. I love it's unique boke background effect, but I wanted something a little sharper.
It's a very hard decision. The Sony has ultimate reach, plus telephoto compatibility and maximum frame rate going for it. But damn is it big. Like, I would have buy a new backpack for it. The Tamron is short enough that you can carry it mounted in a bag. Having said that, the minimum focus distance is really, really nice. I do think Tamron missed an opportunity to distinguish themselves. 100-500 range and a 300g less weight would've given it a very, very clear spot in the Sony lens catalogue.
I have the Sigma 100-400 and I love it, but........since the arrival of the Tamron 150-500 and the Sigma 150-600 Sport I wonder if the trade off in focal distance and size/weight is worth it.
As an avid cyclist, love the T! (and the review, Thanks!)
Thanks Leigh, Always enjoy your vids and this one was no exception. I’m almost am ready to pull the trigger on this Tamron. Recently got my 35-150mm 2-2.8. Regards Bob C
Its a beast, and something i might use a lot just because it is a beast- never owned a lens this big- sounds promising so i ordered one 😊
Excellent review I'm off to Sydney to buy this on Sunday. Trading in a Sigma 150 600 C for Canon and a MC 11 converter. Looking forward to using this on the White Bellied Sea Eagle
Gratis vid! Just what i needed to get convinced. Greethings from the Netherlands.🇳🇱
Great review. Thank you. I shoot the Sony FE 200-600mm and love the lens in the sunlight. If the Sigma lens were available at the time that I purchased the 200-600, I would have strongly leaned towards saving the $500 for a similarly sized lens (by weight) of similar quality. Although I do like that the Sony internally focuses. It's a great lens until the sun starts to set, your are indoors, or under stadium lights. At which point, I shoot with a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 adapted to Sony, and it works great. If you go into APS-C mode you get to 450mm f4 on that lens if you need some more reach. On the Sony 200-600 I also replaced the lens foot with an Arca Swiss foot. In summary, I have no reason to buy the Sigma already having the Sony 200-600, but would have taken a very hard look at buying the Sigma if it were available earlier.
would love to see a comparison w/ several superzooms vs RX10m4!
I may be the first to use this lense on a Sony ZX10E. Besides being an APS-C camera where the lengths run from 225 to 750 what should I remain aware of. I might end up with a full frame 7C someday.
Until recently, I shot Sony. For a Super Telephoto, my 1st option was the 200-600 on an A7iii, but I was planning a trip to Banff Alberta & to be blunt, the 200-600 was simply too big to put in my camera backpack "just in case" I saw something. This led me to the 100-400 and the A7Riii. With that combination, I could crop to give me an image with roughly the same reach and the same resolution as my first set up.
I just switched over to Nikon and a Z8. The Z 100-400 S Lens is very expensive and the newly announced Z 180-600 will have the same size & weight issues as the Sony 200-600 did. This Tamron, however is rumoured to be coming in a Z Mount and if it is, this has the potential to be a "Goldilocks" super-tele.
My fingers are crossed.
Did you end up getting it now that it's on Nikon Z mount? I've recently switched from Canon to Nikon Z8, and I'm considering this Tamron as my super tele lens too! IF you have got it, what's your experience?
@@KPAki1Ler I ordered it and when it came in, there was a fair bit of "play" between the camera and the lens. I refused to accept it and asked that they return it to Tamron & get me a new one. If it doesn't have any play, then great! If it does, however, then I will cancel the order and probably opt for the Nikkor Z 100-400S.
No Nikon F mount? I have the Tamron 24-70 and it is pretty nice
I have both of Sony’s longer telephoto zooms, to be able to combine those into a single, versatile package is really interesting. Maybe this becomes the travel zoom, especially at the price point b
Hi Leigh, I like the zoom range. Would you use this on a Nikon Z7ii, with the Techart Sony E - Nikon Z Autofocus Adapter (TZE-01)? Would you be worried about any compatibility issues? Should I just wait for the Nikon Z 100-400? I'm not worried about the extra 500mm reach. Thanks, Robert DeVoe-Peterson
Hello which one would you recommend this or Sigma. Where I live Sigma sport is cheaper by 150$ but I hear Sigma af is not as good as Tamron
Typically excellent review! That focus ring lock looks great. And yeah that thing is tiny and it does matter as much as you say in my experience.
Personal preference is key. I hike. I usually want compactness and portability. I only own lenses to 200mm. ( and those can be pretty hefty to hike with)But if I had to carry a monster lens to get the shots I want I would. So I would go with this Tamron but…..Lol…..I’m also an aperture queen. That 6.7 is sort of off putting. Im also a Nikon Z 6ll user so it’s a moot point. But maybe Nikon will come out with something or share their mount with third parties. And thank you for another informative review.
This was a different review, informing. Thanks.
I own the Sony 70-350 and use it on a a6600. I consider to upgrade, the Tamron 150-500 is only 11 mm longer than Sigma 100-400, still much heavier.
I am not sure if the Sigma is an upgrade at all.
Are you considering the Sigma 100-400mm or the new Sigma 150-600mm as a replacement for the Sony 70-350mm? I agree that going from 350mm to 400mm on the long end isn't a large improvement in terms of focal length. However, the difference between 350mm to 600mm is much larger.
@@LeighAndRaymond Before Tamron released the 150-500 the Sigma 100-400 looked interesting. Sigma 150-600 is to big.
600 is 900 on APS-C. If I upgrade to full frame an a7R4 will give me 26 mp in APS-C mode.
Maybe the Sony 100-400 GM is the best choice.
For non deliberate specific purposes the big heavy lenses are often left at home
My sentiments exactly.
How are you Leigh? Which telephoto lens is the most suitable and with the largest distance possible for the E-mount APS-C format? I have a Sony a6400 and I’m into bird and nature photography. Greetings from Machupicchu, Cusco, 🇵🇪
If your main consideration is to have the most reach, Sony makes a 600mm f/4 and a 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3, and Sigma recently announced a 150-600mm f/4.5-6.3. I discuss them here: ruclips.net/video/nEC15HWlrBQ/видео.html and ruclips.net/video/5HetVlKOFak/видео.html
Nice lens! Any issues with vignetting, distortion or chromatic aberrations ant either the long or short end?
Good question - the lens profile corrections in Lightroom took care of any vignetting and distortion. I didn't specifically test for chromatic aberrations but I also didn't run across any in my time with the lens.
Thank you so much! Very helpful and I made my decision :)
hi hope well do u do wildlife and if so what camera and lens do u use i have a nikon z7 with 24-200 but have just recently bought siga 150-600 via adapter but my ultimate lens is the 500mm Pf but thinking of getting a second body for the lens for my wildlife photography but have been recommended sony mirrorless i know theres an adapter which can buy to attach sony E mount lenses like this i hope onto nikon z mount body have you tried this adapter yet or will u be getting one to try it out
how does it work on sony a6400?
has anyone tried this for a airshow ? how was the sharpness ?interested in this lens for Nikon z mount
love the review...thanks
Oh my goodness she's so stunning it's hard to focus on discussion. I think it's very telling that User Experience (UX) is at last becoming a priority in camera lenses, like it is in so many other areas of business.
Have you tried to adapt the lens to your Z7 with the techart adapter?
I did not. That would have been fun though!
The design of the Tamron lens collar is perfect in terms of the mount as well as how easy it is to remove. Also, it doesn’t leave some odd space that is missing something when you take it off. You wouldn’t be able to notice it is supposed to have one. The Sony, when it’s removed. Looks stupid.
Hmmm...sounds nice. But here is the issue. With the Sony A1 all the 3rd party lenses are getting a hit now. Because they don't support 30fps what is a key point of the A1. I personally would not buy the Tamron because of this reason. The Sony 200-600mm would be the way to go for me as it supports 30fps of my A1.
Any info with regard to Tamron offering an F mount (Nikon)? I don’t want to use an adapter and add more weight.
The Tamron is designed for mirrorless bodies, so for F-mount, you're going to be stuck with the Tamron/Sigma 100-400 or 150-600.
In my country (Netherlands ) it costs € 1499 ,but the Tamron 150 - 600 mm vc usd g2 only €1249 ! So it is not cheap.
Help ..help….I got new Sony A6500…for free…..I’m a newbie ….I need a zoom lens cheap ….looking into Sony 55-210mm……since I’m new will that lens reach out to 50-70 yards …..for close up shots …I go to college football and MLB baseball…like to take shots of them on the field…from my seat …I sit close to the field ….my next step will be the tamron 70-300mm …but 400$ plus little out of my range …right now …with not knowing if I even going to like taking pictures…lol…lol…..please help with any info …on that lens …or any other under 250$ that would work ….
We now need 200 to 800
✌🏻