p.2 #4 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
A few pictures from a recent overnight camping trip to Point Farms provincial park on Lake Huron.
The post processing was done in DxO PL6 where "Fine contrast" in midtones was reduced in some cases to soften the out of focus background. In upload #5 I did not like the original green and desaturated it.
The nature on the eastern shores of Lake Huron in Southern Ontario is unpretentious - this is probably what the following pictures display.
p.2 #5 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
Thanks for posting. From all the images I can see here, it's about the same optical performance as the 100-400GM I had in the past. I'm going to order it soon, this zoom range when traveling or hiking should really be useful.
p.2 #6 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
For disclosure, I often spend much time processing the images I take, from this and other lenses. I don't do any significant changes, e.g. sky replacement. However, I am interested in experimenting with different color profiles available from DxO PL and Filmpack; thus, the colors in the processed images may be biased toward some shades of green, blue, red etc. and may not look "true to life." The lens and the camera supply the raw files of reasonable quality, but there is somewhat loose connection between the look of the out of camera and the processed jpegs. This lens may take some time to get used to.
Fboss wrote:
Thanks for posting. From all the images I can see here, it's about the same optical performance as the 100-400GM I had in the past. I'm going to order it soon, this zoom range when traveling or hiking should really be useful.
p.2 #7 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
Fboss wrote:
Thanks for posting. From all the images I can see here, it's about the same optical performance as the 100-400GM I had in the past. I'm going to order it soon, this zoom range when traveling or hiking should really be useful.
On my test chart it fared quite worse than 100-400GM and Sigma 100-400 EF mount lenses. But for landscapes it worked just as good and better in some ways. See my review https://jtra.cz/stuff/review/tamron-50-400/
The extended range is great and it pairs well with my 16-35/4 PZ as two lens hiking set up.
p.2 #8 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
jtra wrote:
On my test chart it fared quite worse than 100-400GM and Sigma 100-400 EF mount lenses. But for landscapes it worked just as good and better in some ways. See my review https://jtra.cz/stuff/review/tamron-50-400/
The extended range is great and it pairs well with my 16-35/4 PZ as two lens hiking set up.
I have wondered if the 70-200GMii with a 1.4x can beat the 50-400 at 400mm
The 100-400GM is sharper than the 70-200GMii with a TC, but the difference is smaller than one would expect
p.2 #9 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
aCuria wrote:
I have wondered if the 70-200GMii with a 1.4x can beat the 50-400 at 400mm
The 100-400GM is sharper than the 70-200GMii with a TC, but the difference is smaller than one would expect
I have fairly extensively tested the 50-400mm, 100-400mm and GM 70-200mm f2.8 II. My results have pretty much paralleled Marc Aldaheff's results at www.sonyalpha.blog . He has charts summarizing performance and has even tested the 70-200mm with teleconverters.
p.2 #10 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
InFocus2014 wrote:
I have fairly extensively tested the 50-400mm, 100-400mm and GM 70-200mm f2.8 II. My results have pretty much paralleled Marc Aldaheff's results at www.sonyalpha.blog . He has charts summarizing performance and has even tested the 70-200mm with teleconverters.
Yes, this is an informative and useful review. I would question the "The color rendition is very good", as I see a yellow-greenish color cast. Also, "The background blur is very smooth" sounds exaggerated. It could be smoother. In some pictures, the background blur looks swirly. I strongly disagree with "It is a massive lens and quite heavy, you may want to buy the optional tripod collar for usage on monopod"- the lens feels comfortable in my hands and I don't see any reason for a collar or monopod except when shooting from a single location for a prolonged period of time. The lens can be taken on multi-hour walks without problems, when carried in a holster, over a shoulder.
"Vignetting and distortion are quite important" - perhaps, as with many other lenses. "The zoom ring is a bit hard not allowing smooth zoom" - this hasn't been my experience.
p.2 #11 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
aCuria wrote:
I have wondered if the 70-200GMii with a 1.4x can beat the 50-400 at 400mm
The 100-400GM is sharper than the 70-200GMii with a TC, but the difference is smaller than one would expect
ruthenium made some tests and shared the RAW files. The Tamron 50-400mm at 400mm was also slightly better than the 70-200GMII + 1.4x + crop. And the 200-600mm at 400mm was even better.
What we need now is a new 100-400GMII !
p.2 #12 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
Fboss wrote:
ruthenium made some tests and shared the RAW files. The Tamron 50-400mm at 400mm was also slightly better than the 70-200GMII + 1.4x + crop. And the 200-600mm at 400mm was even better.
What we need now is a new 100-400GMII !
Some lenses have preferred uses (preferred meaning that these lenses are better than the alternatives for some applications). I believe that the 50-400 might be a choice lens for street photography where there are people in the frame and where the focus is on people, whereas the photographer would like to be reasonably distant from the scene and as much unnoticed as the circumstances allow. I would rather take the 50-400 than the Sony 100-400 in such situations. Having said this, I would very much like to see 100-400 GMII and would almost certainly buy it, but for different uses (like for shooting fast action). The problem with the 70-200 GMII and 2.0x TC is that this is equivalent to 140-400 mm, which isn't 50-400 mm. Removing the TC to get back to 70-200 mm can be more challenging than replacing the entire lens. E.g., using the 100-400 for the longer shots, and replacing it by the 70-200 for portraits might make more sense than adding a TC and taking it off.
p.2 #13 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
ruthenium wrote:
Some lenses have preferred uses (preferred meaning that these lenses are better than the alternatives for some applications). I believe that the 50-400 might be a choice lens for street photography where there are people in the frame and where the focus is on people, whereas the photographer would like to be reasonably distant from the scene and as much unnoticed as the circumstances allow. I would rather take the 50-400 than the Sony 100-400 in such situations. Having said this, I would very much like to see 100-400 GMII and would almost certainly buy it, but for different uses (like for shooting fast action). The problem with the 70-200 GMII and 2.0x TC is that this is equivalent to 140-400 mm, which isn't 50-400 mm. Removing the TC to get back to 70-200 mm can be more challenging than replacing the entire lens. E.g., using the 100-400 for the longer shots, and replacing it by the 70-200 for portraits might make more sense than adding a TC and taking it off. ...Show more →
I used my 70-200mm a lot with the TC 1.4x, and it was indeed annoying to remove/add it. The TC is great for when you need the extra reach occasionally. But for BIF/ wildlife / landscape, it was either a bit too short or too long with the TC.
The 70-200GMII is an awesome lens for street photography, but I was never comfortable to use it in public (white color + size) where I prefer to be unnoticed. So I sold it recently, although it's an incredible and the sharpest zoom lens I have ever used.
Now I'm considering the 70-180 G2 for street/portraits, and 50-400mm for everything else.
p.2 #14 · Tamron 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD Image Thread
ruthenium wrote:
Some lenses have preferred uses (preferred meaning that these lenses are better than the alternatives for some applications). I believe that the 50-400 might be a choice lens for street photography where there are people in the frame and where the focus is on people, whereas the photographer would like to be reasonably distant from the scene and as much unnoticed as the circumstances allow. I would rather take the 50-400 than the Sony 100-400 in such situations. Having said this, I would very much like to see 100-400 GMII and would almost certainly buy it, but for different uses (like for shooting fast action). The problem with the 70-200 GMII and 2.0x TC is that this is equivalent to 140-400 mm, which isn't 50-400 mm. Removing the TC to get back to 70-200 mm can be more challenging than replacing the entire lens. E.g., using the 100-400 for the longer shots, and replacing it by the 70-200 for portraits might make more sense than adding a TC and taking it off. ...Show more →
I agree that removing the TC is annoying, i did have the canon one but never got round to buying the Sony variant for this reason. Some months ago there was a v2 TC rumor that never materialized, I figure I would wait for that one
I suppose cropping the 70-200 (to 400mm) on a R series camera would be a more equivalent test against the 50-400 for usability reasons related to the TC, this should favor the 50-400 to a the greatest extent
I disagree about the street photography point, both lenses are about the same size, and if you dislike the color, that is easily fixed with a vinyl wrap or lenscoat
