Author Topic: R u Confuse over choosing Tele Zoom lens??  (Read 951 times)

Offline dranand

  • Mentor
  • Loyalist
  • *
  • Posts: 103
R u Confuse over choosing Tele Zoom lens??
« on: March 29, 2016, 08:50:30 PM »
R u Confuse over choosing Tele Zoom lens??

Dear friends ,

Recently I had opportunity to test various zoom lens like Tamron 150-600 , Canon 100-400 MarkII and Sigma 150-600 Sports. All 3 lenses r awesome u don?t disappoint buying anyone of these 3. But choosing best lens among these 3 is difficult??? ??.Not for me after testing aggressively in detail specially Tamron and Canon.

Sigma 150-600?. Its completely out from this competition ( at least from my list)  becoz of its wt? almost closer to 3kg?.. I seriously don?t know why Sigma didn?t do R&D on choosing light wt.material. Even Canon 300 F/2.8 L IS mark II is lighter. This just proves how canon is way ahead in market.
Lens is too heavy , getting handheld shot is very difficult. U cant roam around with lens for long time. Tripod is must ? and head has to be good quality like Manfrotto Hydrostatic or Arca Swiss or best is gimbal. So add another at least  25-40K on tripod /head.

What I like in Sigma ? Construction , Sharpness at all focal end.

What I didn?t like In Sigma ? Of course Wt and Colors ( un-natural  of course compare to L series lenses)

So lets discuss Between Tamy and Canon ?. I will try to put in a simple way.

Why u buy Tamron-  Full frame users
                                     Those who r into more of Birding than mammals.
                                    People who knows PS processing to enhance colors.

Why u buy Canon ?  Crop users.
                                    More perfectionist people who r more concern about sharpness , colors rather than               extra zoom range.
                               Undoubtly super sharp among Tamy and sigma. At 400mm F/8 it almost closer to my Canon 100 L macro.
                                  Macro ??. Yes u can use extensively for macro.
                     People who travel a lot and needs to carry light.

What I like in Tamron -  Sharpness and light wt ( compare to sigma)

What I didn?t like in Tamron ? Colors r slightly dull , Bird in flight is very difficult due to firm zoom ring , No weather proof? within 3-4 outings u will see dust inside lens.

Conclusion -  Tamron has only advantage of extra 200mm. On other side Canon 100-400 mark 2 is more versatile ,  u can do all types of photography from portraits to macro to Landscapes to wildlife. So those who r thinking to carry light ?. Want all rounder performance ?. Super perfection in colors and sharpness ?. Formula 1 focusing speed ?. Then certainly Canon is the choice. No other lens will perform closer this beauty.
I am really surprised , I haven?t seen any macro shots from Canon 100-400 so I am attaching few of them to justify what I said earlier.

All Shots r From Canon EF 100-400 F/4.5,5.6 L IS II lens 400mm on 7DmarkII..... No sharpness applied.

1.  Black Prince Butterfly  at 400mm F/5.6

2.  Line Blue -  With 20mm Extention tube at 400mm F/8 .... cropped 30%.  Size of butterfly is just 25 paisa coin.

3. uncropped

4. Uncropped

5. Uncropped

6. With 20mm ET full frame shot 400 F/8

Photos from Tamy .... here is the link

 C&C most welcome.

« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 12:00:40 AM by LightWave »