Super review and well done for focusing on the great macro capabilities of the Tamron 150-500, almost always overlooked in every other review I've seen. The other feature that never gets highlighted is the fact that the Tamron does 150-241mm@f/5, 242-387mm@f/5.6, 383-499mm@f/6.3 and only goes to f/6.7 at that last 1mm 499-500mm. Reviewers over state the f/6.7 part as if it hits this way down the zoom range. Not sure wht they do that?
Tamron continues to impress with each new lens release, this test however highlights once again just how impressive the Sony 200-600 MM super telephoto lens is. The compact size of the Tamron is a big plus and the price which is frequently discounted with rebates and such make it a bargain. It's unfortunate that Sony seems to be intentionally limiting the frames per second capability of this and other Tamron lenses which used the more sophisticated VXD linear focus mechanism. Excellent review as always Dustin Abbott, thank you for your due diligence.
Something that no one really covers is the bokeh that the tamron produces. More particularly with small light sources in the background. My produced soap bubble bokeh at 400-500mm. Goes great with birds
nice review, i havent finished it yet. I'm told by many reviewers that it doesnt hit f6.7 and remains at f6.3 for the most part of 400-500mm range. perhaps at 480mm is where it switches to f6.7. so for the most part, its an f5-f6.3 lens, we may say.
Thanks for the vote of confidence...and it's kind of refreshing to be thought of as a "major" channel considering that hasn't been the case in the past.
Something another reviewer brought up was that the Tamron stayed at f6.3 almost all the way to 500mm, 470-480mm, before stopping down to f6.7. That is a key consideration for me.
Hello from Kyiv Ukraine. I have waited what seems like forever for this review. I have watched many reviews but only yours is truely in depth, accurate and trusted. This is my next purchase on June 10. This lens for me and my style of photography completes my zoom lenses : Tamron 17 to 28 / 28 to 75 / 70 to 180 and very soon 150 to 500. My job is shooting models and making porfolios for them and fashion photography. When I am not doing this my past time is photography. I love going out on my bycycle with one of my Sony bodies and 2 to 4 lenses. So for me the form factor of this lens was the important thing (of course focus capabilities and high quality images is also important to me) so 30 FPS is not something I need or will miss. On one review it was stated that the F6.7 is right at the very end of the range and just stepping back just a very tiny bit keeps you in 6.3 which is something worth knowing (can you confirm this?). Really not can wait to get this lens in my bag and cycle around Kyiv. Thanks very much for another superb in depth review. Your verdicts are the only ones that count. Since moving to Sony FE I have purchased 16 lenses on your recommendations and I have enjoyed every one. Thanks again. Just need to get this past my wife and into my studio at home another advantage of the compact size.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Well that is a good thing. Means if you can get the shot around 480mm you can stay at 6.3. Reminds me of the 70 to 180. Many people were conerned about that last 20mm that Tamron excluded in the range but to be honest I never notice.
I use the ThinkTank Streetwalker Harddrive as my main backpack, my daily bag. With the hood reversed, the 150-500 fits end to end with my A7III connected to its 28-200, with room between them for two Breakthrough Photography magnetic filters in their cases. An incredible thing as the 150-500 sits in the exact space normally set for my 100-400! I do want to add: the a/s collar is magnesium and the rear barrel of the lens, including where the collar is set, back to the mount, is in fact metal. The lens is not all engineered plastics. Lastly: what a world we're in where we have the luxury to even consider 15fps somehow "not enough" when so many of us were trained to succeed using shutter lever mechanisms in our film days, feeling unbelievably blessed when 5fps was the norm. The golden age of phototechnology is certainly upon us. Thanks, as always, for all you do, Dustin.
Fair points, Marc, though my observations are less about whether or not 15FPS is "enough", but rather to accurately report on potential limitations. If someone buys the lens thinking they'll get 30FPS and discovers they get half that, they won't be very happy.
@@DustinAbbottTWI agreed 100%, good sir. I didn't mean at all to misrepresent or to expect any such thing. Please forgive if that's how I came across. It was not my intent. I was more laughing at the fact that these are the things we get to grumble about in this day and age of photo tech :) every time I go back to shoot on my Nikon FM2n, it's a tectonic paradigm shift.
Late to this review, but wonderful as usual Dustin. Would love to see a straight head to head with the Sigma 150-600. I have watched your review on it, but would love to hear the "Under $1500 Zoom" dialogue. Thanks again Brother... looking at getting an A7iv to replace my Z6ii, purely for the Super Tele's.
As this lens has recently released for Nikon, I have been seriously considering it paired with a Nikon Z8. I like its form factor vs the outstanding Nikon 180-600 which has similar specifications to the Sony 200-600. It would be great to do an update comparison to the Nikon version of the 150-500 with the Nikon 180-600
I've just added a Z8 myself, and I will slowly roll through Tamron's Z-mount offerings. It probably will be a few months before I get to this lens, though.
Wonderful review. Great mix as always of terrific real world and test chart shots. Back to the kind of lens that makes Sony look like a great platform. My only suggestion would be to see how the lens performs with a more consumer end camera. This might be a good fit for folks who are shooting the 7iii.
Top review as usual! I was hoping for a mirrorless and improved version of the 150-600 g2, so this came as a surprise. It’s an excellent lens but the target is definitely different from g2, those extra 100mm and tc make me stick to the g2 for birding
Great review, could not believe you posted your definitive review allready :) good to know it holds up, but was hoping it would perform like it performs at 150mm, not that it is bad a 500mm… :) How does it hold up to the 100-400 GM? I rented this lens a couple of times and i really like it. I’m curious when it go’s from F6.3 to F6.7 and when we established that, does the quality hold up? So just for fun you could add this in your standard review.
Curious about your opening comment, as the lens is basically equally good at 500mm as it is at 150mm. Optically this lens is fairly similar to the 100-400 GM.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Ok, now I’m curious because from what you shown in your tests results, i found it to be sharper at the 150 mark then it is at 500. That the corners are a little softer at 500 is acceptable, the center is sharp, but equally as it is at 150?. Now I’m little confused because from what i’ve seen but also what you kinda said in your video review, for me this is what i picked up from it. I’m going to rewatch your review, because based on your reply it sounds like i mis understood what you where saying :) (which is a good thing)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Now the part i was hoping you where curious about, is the part it go’s from F6.3 to F6.7 and when we established that, does the quality hold up against the 100-400. This means if it does, it’s not only a great performer at 500 but it also means that when you need that extra 1/3 stop of light you can make that choice in the field and still get a sharp photo out of it. Just trying to say, it could be considered, at some point, to be an 150-475 - 5.6-6.3 if the performance is there.
The lack of being able to fit a TC to this lens is mitigated to some degree on the higher MP alpha bodies like the A7R iv when shooting in Super 35 mode.
Hi Dustin! Absolutely love the review! Do you think there's a need to get this lens if I already own the Sony 70-350mm. I use the Sony A6400 and wanted absolutely love my lens but feel that that I missing out on the reach. What would you suggest?
Always appreciate your reviews. My only concern was when you were discussing the Sony being better at shooting the dogs the photos you showed were of the dog running to your left on the sand without the sparkling of the water. Did the Sony have the hit percentage you stated (90%) compared to the Tamron taking into consideration the Tamron included the water where the Sony clearly did not?
Thanks for another great review video Dustin. How would you say the Tamron 150-500 compares to the sigma 100-400? I was planning on picking up the Sigma, but now there are options to consider.
Hi Dustin, I’ve heard that with the Sigma 150-600mm the image quality on the long end is quite a bit better if you zoom out slightly (even just to 550mm) then crop a little in post to compensate. Did you find anything like this for this lens as well?
From what I can tell, the Tamron 150-600mm G2 is only slightly heavier (without an adapter) but with a longer zoom range and faster maximum aperture. My question is not why you would get one or the other, rather do you have a sense of what Tamron's design priorities were for this new mirrorless lens given how some of the key specs fall short of its DSLR predecessor without being as light as something like the Sony 100-400 or Canon RF 100-500?
This lens is 50mm shorter, has better autofocus, and is optically superior. Using the older lens on an adapter will give a vastly inferior autofocusing performance.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you. So perhaps from a design standpoint the "focus" was on putting in the new focus motors and improved performance at the apertures it works at. Still interesting that the weight is so close as I would think the larger aperture on the G2 would be a lot heavier given that it does 600mm and at a slightly wider aperture.
@@DustinAbbottTWI optically superior to the G2? Hmmm. I love mine (Canon EF) though now that I have a R5 and Canon 500 II, it's not getting as much use....
Very insightful, thanks. Also read the review on your site. I'm seriously considering one of these for purchase. You reviewed both the Sigma last year and now this one. You speak of less AF-performance and less reach (100mm in tele although the Sigma offers 50mm more in the wide-end).. Is the 500 USD extra for the Tamron really worth it compared to the Sigma? It's 50% of the Sigma for perhaps a slightly better performing telelens or is it really in a different class?
Hi Dustin, I have seen your indepth & definitive reviews for both Tamron 150-500 & Sigma 150-600 DG DN OS Sports Lens... As usual both reviews are excellent. I have been hearing some users facing some focusing issues with Sigma...since I am planning to buy one of these Zoom lens for mainly Landscape photography with some Bird & Wildlife photography which would be your final recommendation...currently there is a discount scheme on Sigma 150-600 so its infact slightly cheaper than Tamron. I use a Sony A7RIII currently...Thanks !!
looking forward to this for a long time now! thanks so much. As I see it as only a wildlife lens for me, I feel that it's probably not worth it unless Sony releases a more ergonomic aps-c camera. Maybe by then I can get a used copy! :)
Hello sir!Always i enjoy your reviews!Very nice job! congrats!Can you tell us the focus settings you use in the scene with the dog come to you;thank you!
A Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS Sports is to be announced soon (rumour!). That will spice things up. For me, the internal zoom on the 200-600G is something that I wouldn't be willing to give away easily, but I m always confident in Sigma producing something that is optically superior (even to the Sony!). I hope, when the time comes, and if possible, to have a side-by-side vs the current 'benchmark' - that is the Sony
Well i bought the lens, thanks for this review, really appreciate it. I get is tomorrow, going in september to Norway and really need a nice zoom lens with me. Going to try it out this weekend, hope it’s as/almost as good as the 100-400GM, shooted with that lens and loved it. I’ll let you know :)
@@DustinAbbottTWI The lens arrived and it’s a very nice build lens. I’m amazed how sharp it is and the 150mm close focusing is a bonus. Now that being said i find it a little on the heavy side, so today i went to the local store and tried the 100-400 GM that i rented a year ago and loved. The GM is definitely lighter and in total width it’s slimmer, i find that the GM is kinda the sweet spot. At the local store i shot some test shots of a brick wall with the Tamron and the GM but imo they are both equally sharp in the center, GM has the edge on the corners. Now the local store also had the 1.4x TC which made the GM not as sharp, kinda surprised by that because a-lot like it, i find it ok and i rather use a crop sensor. Now i have to make a decision, i find it the hardest choice ever which one to pick, both haves their strong points.
Hello Dustin Abbott, best review as always; You talk about accuracy percentage of AF. How is the accuracy with a A7R3? DOes this lens keep focusing while zooming (is parafocal)? Many thanks if you'll answer to both my questions
I didn’t test it with an a7R3, but expect it to be a little worse than what you see here due to the slightly weaker focus system of the R3. I don’t think the lens is parfocal.
I was hoping that Tamron would later release a 1.4x teleconverter later by reverse engineering (As sony doesnt provide any specifications to third party on TCs), perhaps this was how it created for dslrs. But you're saying there's no provision to have a TC in the first place, so that's the end of hope I believe.
Hi Ryan, my point is less "is 15FPs enough" and more reporting on the reality that you may not be achieve the full burst rate of your camera with this lens, which is definitely relevant information for potential buyers.
So now, if you have time to kill, how about comparing with the Sony100-400 GM with and without the 1.4x tc? For those of us fortunate enough to not have cost as a deciding factor (personally, weight is a more significant issue) Which is the better option? As a birder, the extra 60mm with the tc would be greatly appreciated if the loss of IQ price wasn't to great, and as a 70+ year old, the loss of 500 gm would be appreciated as well.
Mr Landers, I dn't have any of those either but I can confidently assure you that the GM lens will keep up with the 1.4x so well! just check out Mark Smith videos with that combo!
The lens oddly changes to the smallest maximum aperture of F6.7 only at 500 mm. At 499 mm, it is still F6.3. It is quite strange. I wonder if it has been done due to a tehcnical limitation in the lens design (maybe it just quite didn't reach a goal), or reviews in mind (not many reviewers do a chart test at 499 mm...) - maybe it would not have been adequately sharp at 500 mm F6.3.
I'm wondering if it really has 1/3 stop more light at 499 vs 500mm or is 500mm simply the point at which it finally reaches f6.7 (So it's ~f6.69 at 499mm).
@@sulev111 I think that's the case. Not the most scientific way to do things, but I looked into the lens while extending it, and there's no sudden step, it's all smooth, I think it's just the readout jumping from one step to the next at 500mm.
Against the original 200-500 DSLR mount lens (known as the A08), there's absolutely no comparison. A good 10 years of Tamron's best optical and mechanical upgrades are present and it will show, both in handling and on the monitor.
How does the AF of this Tamron compare with the Sigma 100-400mm DN? I have the Sigma and AF is ok but not great. I don't really need the 500mm, and I got the Sigma because it's so much lighter. Considering tolerating the larger size and weight for better AF. This is on an A7RIII and I probably won't upgrade the camera in the next couple of years.
Dang I want this too, nobody seems to even consider mentioning them together. Meh I may just get it anyway, I'll just check the size and the weights and sell the old
@@shaunreich Well I own the sigma 100/400 and it's a very nice lens but the tamron 150/500 seems a bit nicer in some area's so a comparison would be great.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for your reply. I understand it's a loaner but we would really really appreciate it. And since your reviews are among the best I asked you first
@@DustinAbbottTWI If Sigma and Tamron continue to be one trick Sony lens providers and continue to ignore Nikon and Canon shooters, there could be hell to pay by millions of non-Sony photographers in the future.
@@stanobert3475 It is not Tamron/Sigma's fault that Nikon & Canon refuse to open their new mounts. They also need to be cautious of lawsuits (Nikon has sued Sigma & others before), probably Viltrox is getting away with making AF Nikon Z lenses, as good luck suing a Chinese company. Tamron/Sigma have hinted that they are working on lens for Nikon Z recently though.
The 200-600 sucks with the RIV and for whatever reason sony doesnt want to address it. Is the 150-500 better with AF if you have tested on the RIV? Regrettably sold the 200-600 as way too many shots were getting missed and looking to replace it.
That's interesting. I did shoot with it a bit on the RIII back when I reviewed it, and it was definitely much poorer AF compared to my a9. I can't imagine that the Tamron would be better than the 200-600, but I could be wrong.
@@cameraprepper7938 it seems to be hit and miss which is the frustrating issue. Mark Smith here has a video or two on it I believe. I didn’t know of the issue until all my riv shots with it were slightly soft. Then putting the 200-600 on either of my other Sony’s no problem.
That lens is only relevant if you're a Canon shooter, as the Tamron is only for Sony. The Canon is also $2700, so you're paying a LOT for that extra 50mm.
@@DustinAbbottTWI the logic is I won't buy Sony. This will either be other Manufacturer mounts added. Or there probably already is similar Tamron lenses in other mounts. Either way. I'm good. Don't be offended though. It was a good review.
I was so waiting for this!
It doesn't matter how many reviews I go through, the clarity I get from your reviews is unparalleled 🙏
Thanks for the vote of confidence.
Super review and well done for focusing on the great macro capabilities of the Tamron 150-500, almost always overlooked in every other review I've seen. The other feature that never gets highlighted is the fact that the Tamron does 150-241mm@f/5, 242-387mm@f/5.6, 383-499mm@f/6.3 and only goes to f/6.7 at that last 1mm 499-500mm. Reviewers over state the f/6.7 part as if it hits this way down the zoom range. Not sure wht they do that?
Tamron continues to impress with each new lens release, this test however highlights once again just how impressive the Sony 200-600 MM super telephoto lens is. The compact size of the Tamron is a big plus and the price which is frequently discounted with rebates and such make it a bargain. It's unfortunate that Sony seems to be intentionally limiting the frames per second capability of this and other Tamron lenses which used the more sophisticated VXD linear focus mechanism. Excellent review as always Dustin Abbott, thank you for your due diligence.
My pleasure, Heath, and I agree on all points here.
Your reviews really are top notch Dustin, none of the others on RUclips come close tbh, thanks for the taking the time to make them!
That's very high praise, Sam, thank you!
Simply the most professional reviewer out there. Thumbs up!
Thank you very much!!
Something that no one really covers is the bokeh that the tamron produces. More particularly with small light sources in the background. My produced soap bubble bokeh at 400-500mm. Goes great with birds
It does have fairly nice bokeh for this type of lens.
nice review, i havent finished it yet. I'm told by many reviewers that it doesnt hit f6.7 and remains at f6.3 for the most part of 400-500mm range. perhaps at 480mm is where it switches to f6.7. so for the most part, its an f5-f6.3 lens, we may say.
That's correct about the aperture.
Absolutely first class, balanced, correct level of detail review. I have watched many,few come close.
Thank you
The Benchmark in Reviewers...!! was waiting for this one
Thank you very much!
This is the only review I care about and it’s the 1st one out!!! (Well 1st one from a “major” review channel.) Thank you for another great review DA!
Thanks for the vote of confidence...and it's kind of refreshing to be thought of as a "major" channel considering that hasn't been the case in the past.
Christopher Frost is also worth caring about when he reviews it.
@@gemsandlasers269 you’re right, he’s my second favorite. Touché
Something another reviewer brought up was that the Tamron stayed at f6.3 almost all the way to 500mm, 470-480mm, before stopping down to f6.7. That is a key consideration for me.
That is true. I've got that note in my text review.
Your usual superb and thorough review. You are one of the very best. Cheers
Thank you kindly!
These are the best reviews on the entire web, so well balanced and honest, top job 👍
Hello from Kyiv Ukraine. I have waited what seems like forever for this review. I have watched many reviews but only yours is truely in depth, accurate and trusted. This is my next purchase on June 10. This lens for me and my style of photography completes my zoom lenses : Tamron 17 to 28 / 28 to 75 / 70 to 180 and very soon 150 to 500. My job is shooting models and making porfolios for them and fashion photography. When I am not doing this my past time is photography. I love going out on my bycycle with one of my Sony bodies and 2 to 4 lenses. So for me the form factor of this lens was the important thing (of course focus capabilities and high quality images is also important to me) so 30 FPS is not something I need or will miss. On one review it was stated that the F6.7 is right at the very end of the range and just stepping back just a very tiny bit keeps you in 6.3 which is something worth knowing (can you confirm this?). Really not can wait to get this lens in my bag and cycle around Kyiv. Thanks very much for another superb in depth review. Your verdicts are the only ones that count. Since moving to Sony FE I have purchased 16 lenses on your recommendations and I have enjoyed every one. Thanks again. Just need to get this past my wife and into my studio at home another advantage of the compact size.
It's not until around 480mm that it moves to F6.7
@@DustinAbbottTWI Well that is a good thing. Means if you can get the shot around 480mm you can stay at 6.3. Reminds me of the 70 to 180. Many people were conerned about that last 20mm that Tamron excluded in the range but to be honest I never notice.
Just got mine so I was worried that I hadn’t seen your review yet but you got everything correct. 15 FPS is fine as I am primarily using the a74
Glad I got it right ;)
My man, been waiting for this!
Glad to help out.
Thanks for another great review! My pre-ordered lens should arrive on Friday and now I'm even more excited about it.
I think you'll enjoy the lens, Kyle.
I use the ThinkTank Streetwalker Harddrive as my main backpack, my daily bag. With the hood reversed, the 150-500 fits end to end with my A7III connected to its 28-200, with room between them for two Breakthrough Photography magnetic filters in their cases. An incredible thing as the 150-500 sits in the exact space normally set for my 100-400! I do want to add: the a/s collar is magnesium and the rear barrel of the lens, including where the collar is set, back to the mount, is in fact metal. The lens is not all engineered plastics. Lastly: what a world we're in where we have the luxury to even consider 15fps somehow "not enough" when so many of us were trained to succeed using shutter lever mechanisms in our film days, feeling unbelievably blessed when 5fps was the norm. The golden age of phototechnology is certainly upon us. Thanks, as always, for all you do, Dustin.
Fair points, Marc, though my observations are less about whether or not 15FPS is "enough", but rather to accurately report on potential limitations. If someone buys the lens thinking they'll get 30FPS and discovers they get half that, they won't be very happy.
@@DustinAbbottTWI agreed 100%, good sir. I didn't mean at all to misrepresent or to expect any such thing. Please forgive if that's how I came across. It was not my intent. I was more laughing at the fact that these are the things we get to grumble about in this day and age of photo tech :) every time I go back to shoot on my Nikon FM2n, it's a tectonic paradigm shift.
The Tamron 150-500 is a very special lens. It is absolutely perfect for me.
what do i like in Dustin reviews, they are always freaking solid
Thank you!
Great review. Was considering the Sigma 100-400 but this Tamron seems like it's worth waiting and saving for. Thanks!
Glad it was helpful!
Late to this review, but wonderful as usual Dustin. Would love to see a straight head to head with the Sigma 150-600. I have watched your review on it, but would love to hear the "Under $1500 Zoom" dialogue. Thanks again Brother... looking at getting an A7iv to replace my Z6ii, purely for the Super Tele's.
Thanks for the feedback. Unfortunately I don't have either lens on hand anymore (they were loaners) to do a comparison.
As this lens has recently released for Nikon, I have been seriously considering it paired with a Nikon Z8. I like its form factor vs the outstanding Nikon 180-600 which has similar specifications to the Sony 200-600. It would be great to do an update comparison to the Nikon version of the 150-500 with the Nikon 180-600
I've just added a Z8 myself, and I will slowly roll through Tamron's Z-mount offerings. It probably will be a few months before I get to this lens, though.
Wonderful review. Great mix as always of terrific real world and test chart shots. Back to the kind of lens that makes Sony look like a great platform. My only suggestion would be to see how the lens performs with a more consumer end camera. This might be a good fit for folks who are shooting the 7iii.
Hi Larry, the reality is that I can't/don't own endless cameras. I have one Sony test body, and it happens to be a high end one.
Top review as usual!
I was hoping for a mirrorless and improved version of the 150-600 g2, so this came as a surprise. It’s an excellent lens but the target is definitely different from g2, those extra 100mm and tc make me stick to the g2 for birding
If you're shooting on a Sony body, the new lens will give a radically better autofocusing performance.
Great review, could not believe you posted your definitive review allready :) good to know it holds up, but was hoping it would perform like it performs at 150mm, not that it is bad a 500mm… :)
How does it hold up to the 100-400 GM? I rented this lens a couple of times and i really like it.
I’m curious when it go’s from F6.3 to F6.7 and when we established that, does the quality hold up? So just for fun you could add this in your standard review.
Curious about your opening comment, as the lens is basically equally good at 500mm as it is at 150mm. Optically this lens is fairly similar to the 100-400 GM.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Ok, now I’m curious because from what you shown in your tests results, i found it to be sharper at the 150 mark then it is at 500. That the corners are a little softer at 500 is acceptable, the center is sharp, but equally as it is at 150?. Now I’m little confused because from what i’ve seen but also what you kinda said in your video review, for me this is what i picked up from it. I’m going to rewatch your review, because based on your reply it sounds like i mis understood what you where saying :) (which is a good thing)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Now the part i was hoping you where curious about, is the part it go’s from F6.3 to F6.7 and when we established that, does the quality hold up against the 100-400. This means if it does, it’s not only a great performer at 500 but it also means that when you need that extra 1/3 stop of light you can make that choice in the field and still get a sharp photo out of it.
Just trying to say, it could be considered, at some point, to be an 150-475 - 5.6-6.3 if the performance is there.
@@DustinAbbottTWI i0.wp.com/sonyalpha.blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Capture-decran-2021-05-25-a-22.55.34.png?ssl=1
If you add a 1.4 TC to the Sony 100-400 to get to 560mm, what is your F-Stop then? 6.7 doesn’t bother me.
I hope this lens come out for RF mount sooner rather than later.
I agree, though thus far I've not seen any signs of Tamron RF development.
Or you could get the RF 100-500!
The lack of being able to fit a TC to this lens is mitigated to some degree on the higher MP alpha bodies like the A7R iv when shooting in Super 35 mode.
Agreed.
Another excellent video - Your reviews are priceless thanks so much!
You're welcome.
Hi Dustin! Absolutely love the review! Do you think there's a need to get this lens if I already own the Sony 70-350mm. I use the Sony A6400 and wanted absolutely love my lens but feel that that I missing out on the reach. What would you suggest?
The Sony is a very good lens, but yes, this will give you a lot more reach.
Always appreciate your reviews. My only concern was when you were discussing the Sony being better at shooting the dogs the photos you showed were of the dog running to your left on the sand without the sparkling of the water. Did the Sony have the hit percentage you stated (90%) compared to the Tamron taking into consideration the Tamron included the water where the Sony clearly did not?
I didn't show all of the Sony bursts for sake of time. My percentages include runs with the dogs in identical conditions with both lenses.
Excellent review and pacing, All while using natural speech delivery. Didn't mean to review a review haha
LOL - well, since it is that kind, I'll take it ;)
Excellent review as usual. I was eagerly awaiting this one, thanks for doing it! :)
My pleasure!
Thanks for another great review video Dustin. How would you say the Tamron 150-500 compares to the sigma 100-400? I was planning on picking up the Sigma, but now there are options to consider.
They are optically fairly similar, though I felt the Tamron was marginally better in autofocus and definitely has the superior build/weather sealing.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you, that helps.
Excellent Review, very helpful and informative. Many thanks for sharing. 🇬🇧
Glad it was helpful!
Would you be reviewing the Sony FE 40mm 2.5 G, 50mm 2.5 G and 24mm 2.8 G trio?
I do plan to, but I don't have them actually scheduled yet.
Best review ever for this new lens.
Thank you!
Great review. Small correction: F6.3 vs F6.7 is 1/6th of a stop, not 1/3rd.
Thanks for the feedback.
Hi Dustin, I’ve heard that with the Sigma 150-600mm the image quality on the long end is quite a bit better if you zoom out slightly (even just to 550mm) then crop a little in post to compensate. Did you find anything like this for this lens as well?
It's been too many years and WAY too many lenses for me to remember.
From what I can tell, the Tamron 150-600mm G2 is only slightly heavier (without an adapter) but with a longer zoom range and faster maximum aperture. My question is not why you would get one or the other, rather do you have a sense of what Tamron's design priorities were for this new mirrorless lens given how some of the key specs fall short of its DSLR predecessor without being as light as something like the Sony 100-400 or Canon RF 100-500?
This lens is 50mm shorter, has better autofocus, and is optically superior. Using the older lens on an adapter will give a vastly inferior autofocusing performance.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you. So perhaps from a design standpoint the "focus" was on putting in the new focus motors and improved performance at the apertures it works at. Still interesting that the weight is so close as I would think the larger aperture on the G2 would be a lot heavier given that it does 600mm and at a slightly wider aperture.
@@DustinAbbottTWI optically superior to the G2? Hmmm. I love mine (Canon EF) though now that I have a R5 and Canon 500 II, it's not getting as much use....
Very insightful, thanks. Also read the review on your site. I'm seriously considering one of these for purchase. You reviewed both the Sigma last year and now this one. You speak of less AF-performance and less reach (100mm in tele although the Sigma offers 50mm more in the wide-end).. Is the 500 USD extra for the Tamron really worth it compared to the Sigma? It's 50% of the Sigma for perhaps a slightly better performing telelens or is it really in a different class?
I do think this Tamron is a more serious lens. It comes with the tripod collar, has faster autofocus, and is more versatile in the up close work.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for your reply and opinion
Hi Dustin,
I have seen your indepth & definitive reviews for both Tamron 150-500 & Sigma 150-600 DG DN OS Sports Lens... As usual both reviews are excellent. I have been hearing some users facing some focusing issues with Sigma...since I am planning to buy one of these Zoom lens for mainly Landscape photography with some Bird & Wildlife photography which would be your final recommendation...currently there is a discount scheme on Sigma 150-600 so its infact slightly cheaper than Tamron. I use a Sony A7RIII currently...Thanks !!
I slightly lean towards the Tamron due to the more compact size and the better focus, but obviously the Sigma has the better reach.
looking forward to this for a long time now! thanks so much. As I see it as only a wildlife lens for me, I feel that it's probably not worth it unless Sony releases a more ergonomic aps-c camera. Maybe by then I can get a used copy! :)
Lenses this long are not for everyone.
Excellent work! (as usual)
Thanks again!
Hello sir!Always i enjoy your reviews!Very nice job! congrats!Can you tell us the focus settings you use in the scene with the dog come to you;thank you!
I utilized the first case for focus, enabled animal eye detect AF, and H+ burst speed.
@@DustinAbbottTWI focus area?zone?
A Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS Sports is to be announced soon (rumour!). That will spice things up. For me, the internal zoom on the 200-600G is something that I wouldn't be willing to give away easily, but I m always confident in Sigma producing something that is optically superior (even to the Sony!). I hope, when the time comes, and if possible, to have a side-by-side vs the current 'benchmark' - that is the Sony
Should that ever happen (wink, wink), I'll be sure to make that comparison.
Great review! I wish you covered the optical stabilisation performance, is it as good as the Sony in that regard? Thanks!
I did talk about it, but I didn’t see a significant different between the Tamron and the Sony 200-600.
Still okay with my Sigma 100-400 DN
I can’t believe it’s sharpness.
Hate I can’t get a TC. Damnit Sony!
Yes, not being able to get a TC really stinks.
Well i bought the lens, thanks for this review, really appreciate it. I get is tomorrow, going in september to Norway and really need a nice zoom lens with me. Going to try it out this weekend, hope it’s as/almost as good as the 100-400GM, shooted with that lens and loved it. I’ll let you know :)
For sure - be sure to check in and let me know your feelings.
@@DustinAbbottTWI The lens arrived and it’s a very nice build lens. I’m amazed how sharp it is and the 150mm close focusing is a bonus. Now that being said i find it a little on the heavy side, so today i went to the local store and tried the 100-400 GM that i rented a year ago and loved.
The GM is definitely lighter and in total width it’s slimmer, i find that the GM is kinda the sweet spot.
At the local store i shot some test shots of a brick wall with the Tamron and the GM but imo they are both equally sharp in the center, GM has the edge on the corners. Now the local store also had the 1.4x TC which made the GM not as sharp, kinda surprised by that because a-lot like it, i find it ok and i rather use a crop sensor.
Now i have to make a decision, i find it the hardest choice ever which one to pick, both haves their strong points.
Hello Dustin Abbott, best review as always; You talk about accuracy percentage of AF. How is the accuracy with a A7R3? DOes this lens keep focusing while zooming (is parafocal)? Many thanks if you'll answer to both my questions
I didn’t test it with an a7R3, but expect it to be a little worse than what you see here due to the slightly weaker focus system of the R3. I don’t think the lens is parfocal.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for the answer
Going to continually hunt for a used one since I have no reason to buy a new one. Amazing looking value lens though
It is an extremely good lens.
I was hoping that Tamron would later release a 1.4x teleconverter later by reverse engineering (As sony doesnt provide any specifications to third party on TCs), perhaps this was how it created for dslrs. But you're saying there's no provision to have a TC in the first place, so that's the end of hope I believe.
apparently sony won't let 3rd party make them
I'm afraid cyanblues is right.
Great review, thank you!
My pleasure!
How does it work for video? Can it keep the focus? For example filming surfers and wind surfers as they are approaching.
I don't foresee any problem with that.
Since when is 15 fps not enough? Just a lot of extra editing. Looks like a great option, the close focus performance was impressive, .25x at 500mm!
Hi Ryan, my point is less "is 15FPs enough" and more reporting on the reality that you may not be achieve the full burst rate of your camera with this lens, which is definitely relevant information for potential buyers.
So now, if you have time to kill, how about comparing with the Sony100-400 GM with and without the 1.4x tc? For those of us fortunate enough to not have cost as a deciding factor (personally, weight is a more significant issue) Which is the better option? As a birder, the extra 60mm with the tc would be greatly appreciated if the loss of IQ price wasn't to great, and as a 70+ year old, the loss of 500 gm would be appreciated as well.
Hi James, I'm afraid I don't have either 100-400 or the 1.4x.
Mr Landers, I dn't have any of those either but I can confidently assure you that the GM lens will keep up with the 1.4x so well! just check out Mark Smith videos with that combo!
The lens oddly changes to the smallest maximum aperture of F6.7 only at 500 mm. At 499 mm, it is still F6.3. It is quite strange. I wonder if it has been done due to a tehcnical limitation in the lens design (maybe it just quite didn't reach a goal), or reviews in mind (not many reviewers do a chart test at 499 mm...) - maybe it would not have been adequately sharp at 500 mm F6.3.
That is an odd quirk. It does seem that keeping the lens at F6.3 would have made for better marketing.
I'm wondering if it really has 1/3 stop more light at 499 vs 500mm or is 500mm simply the point at which it finally reaches f6.7 (So it's ~f6.69 at 499mm).
@@sulev111 I think that's the case. Not the most scientific way to do things, but I looked into the lens while extending it, and there's no sudden step, it's all smooth, I think it's just the readout jumping from one step to the next at 500mm.
How does it hold against the older 200-500mm Tamron? (optically)
Against the original 200-500 DSLR mount lens (known as the A08), there's absolutely no comparison. A good 10 years of Tamron's best optical and mechanical upgrades are present and it will show, both in handling and on the monitor.
Marc is absolutely right. The two lenses are not really in the same class optically.
How does the AF of this Tamron compare with the Sigma 100-400mm DN? I have the Sigma and AF is ok but not great. I don't really need the 500mm, and I got the Sigma because it's so much lighter. Considering tolerating the larger size and weight for better AF. This is on an A7RIII and I probably won't upgrade the camera in the next couple of years.
I would consider the Tamron to be the faster focusing lens.
Thanks for the video.
You are welcome!
Hi Dustin, will you be reviewing the new Tamron 35-150? Please advise… Glenn
One is on its way to me as we speak.
Gonna get this one!
Enjoy!
Please do a sigma 100/400 vs tamron 150/500 comparison
Unfortunately I don't have either lens on hand now.
Dang I want this too, nobody seems to even consider mentioning them together. Meh I may just get it anyway, I'll just check the size and the weights and sell the old
@@shaunreich Well I own the sigma 100/400 and it's a very nice lens but the tamron 150/500 seems a bit nicer in some area's so a comparison would be great.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for your reply. I understand it's a loaner but we would really really appreciate it. And since your reviews are among the best I asked you first
Thank you Mr Abbott. do you think Tamron will work it's way over to the Canon RF line? Thanks again.
I'd like to think the answer is yes, but I've not seen any direct evidence of that yet.
Physically it would not be difficult to modify other mirrorless lenses. The hard part will be figuring out the electronics with the RF protocol.
I think technically they could just make the lens communicate using the EF protocol, but I don't think they would want to take the half measure.
To be fair, if someone can afford an A1, that person should be able to afford the 600 dollar difference between both lenses
That's true, but as an owner of an A1, I'm still budget conscious with my lenses.
How well do you think this lens will fare with the A7RIV's 61mpx for any possible resolving issues?
That is a demanding sensor, but this is a sharp lens and should fair pretty well.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Sounds good Dustin, thanks.
If Tamron ever creates this lens for the Nikon Z system I will be first in line to purchase one.
I know what you mean. Nikon Z and Canon RF are feeling VERY bare in the third party department.
@@DustinAbbottTWI If Sigma and Tamron continue to be one trick Sony lens providers and continue to ignore Nikon and Canon shooters, there could be hell to pay by millions of non-Sony photographers in the future.
@@stanobert3475 It is not Tamron/Sigma's fault that Nikon & Canon refuse to open their new mounts. They also need to be cautious of lawsuits (Nikon has sued Sigma & others before), probably Viltrox is getting away with making AF Nikon Z lenses, as good luck suing a Chinese company.
Tamron/Sigma have hinted that they are working on lens for Nikon Z recently though.
Dustin I don’t think you realize what a asset you are to us Geer heads I Bless you in Jesus name
Thank you very much!
Best review
Thank you
Funny that you are using a German 20 Deutsche Mark bill for details check.. 😃👍🏻
It's a great subject. Good detail, and shows false color nicely, too. A beautiful bill
Do you own one of the Tamron? After watching this I have one in my cart I am going to pull the trigger
This was a loaner, but I would have purchased one if I hadn't already invested in the big Sony.
The 200-600 sucks with the RIV and for whatever reason sony doesnt want to address it. Is the 150-500 better with AF if you have tested on the RIV? Regrettably sold the 200-600 as way too many shots were getting missed and looking to replace it.
That's interesting. I did shoot with it a bit on the RIII back when I reviewed it, and it was definitely much poorer AF compared to my a9. I can't imagine that the Tamron would be better than the 200-600, but I could be wrong.
I have the Sony A7RIV with the Sony 200-600mm 5.6-6.3 G, a friend of mine have the same combo, we have no problems !
@@cameraprepper7938 it seems to be hit and miss which is the frustrating issue. Mark Smith here has a video or two on it I believe. I didn’t know of the issue until all my riv shots with it were slightly soft. Then putting the 200-600 on either of my other Sony’s no problem.
@@robbie154 I have not heard of any issues until now, I have read many longtime reviews, not seen any problems
Always love the porno music intro. As always: great job, Dustin!
Thank you!
Looks like thermos jug.
LOL. Expensive thermos!
I think I'd rather have the Canon 100-500, for the extra range on the wide end.
That lens is only relevant if you're a Canon shooter, as the Tamron is only for Sony. The Canon is also $2700, so you're paying a LOT for that extra 50mm.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Well, I do own an R5, and I have already been seriously looking at purchasing the 100-500 before an airshow I want to go to.
Lucky for me I hate Sony and would never buy one their cameras. No limit for me... for the moment anyway.
I'm not sure I follow your logic...as that also means you will never be able to use this lens, either, since it is made only for Sony.
@@DustinAbbottTWI the logic is I won't buy Sony. This will either be other Manufacturer mounts added. Or there probably already is similar Tamron lenses in other mounts. Either way. I'm good. Don't be offended though. It was a good review.
Ahhh finally a like-minded Sony hater (actually, truth be told, I DO like some of their Headphones and MP3/Walkman players : ) )