10-10-2019 01:03 PM
Yes, I'll probably rent it. In reading the reviews, it seems like a great lens in its class but has a con of image softness at full focal length extension. When compared to the Canon 400 mm prime with a 1.4X TC, the Canon was sharper. Therefore, there's probably no question that I'll rent the Tamron and see for myself. It's the only way.
10-10-2019 01:37 PM
Don't believe that review! It's wrong. But you do as you see fit a man should always do as he feels right.
10-10-2019 04:10 PM
I would be surprised if the Canon 400 5.6 prime with 1.4X wasn't sharper than the Sigma zoom at its maximum telephoto end. The 400 5.6 is an exceptional telephoto for its price. There are a lot of compromises involved in making a wide range zoom and even Canon's mega expensive 200-400MM with built in extender isn't quite as sharp at 400MM as their 400 F2.8 even thought that 200-400 contains pretty much all of the technology Canon could bring to bear in its design. The Canon 200-400 is an incredible lens with a built in dedicated 1.4X that can be switched in and out on the fly (I have rented one three times and love it but not quite enough to buy it).
IF you don't absolutely need a zoom then a comparably priced prime in the same focal length range is generally going to be better and will also usually respond better to a 1.4X extender. A zoom lens is a convenience at times and a necessity at others so you have to choose which applies most often to your shooting habits and subjects.
Reviews show that your 100-400 does very well with a 1.4X and your 7D2 will AF at this F8 aperture combination. Have you tried this combo yet to see how you like it before buying another lens?
As you continue to increase focal length, especially with a lens of this reach on a "crop" body, you will need a dead steady tripod for many of these wildlife shots and you will find a remote release like the Canon intervalometer to be very useful to avoid inroducing any camera shake.
I like my 400 F5.6 and I have used it quite a bit with a 1.4X however there is no question that it is noticeably softer with the 1.4X. Its faster 300 F2.8 and 400 F2.8 suffer far less noticeable degradation but those are so sharp to start with that it is less of a concern in most cases.
I picked up a Canon 2X years ago but have always felt that the image degradation was too great with any of the primes I own to make me want to use it.
10-10-2019 04:35 PM
Great response. Yes, I know that the Canon 400 mm f5.6 is a great lens although found this out today (LOL). It definitely is affordable. Frankly, however, I really do like a zoom lens. In Florida, I often shoot wildlife at a distance or really close. I love my Canon 100 - 400 mm II for that reason. I really don't want to use a prime lens. My wife switched to mirrorless and gave me her Canon 300 mm f/4 lens. I used it but was really unhappy with the sharpness of images compared to my 100 - 400 lens and really super unhappy with images when I attached the 1.4X TC. As a result, I immediately sent the 300 mm lens and the TC to B and H to sell them. Buying the Canon 400 mm f/5.6 prime now without the TC doesn't make sense to me and I'm still suspicious about putting a TC on it.
I have also used my 100 - 400 mm II lens with the TC and I thought the images were soft at full extension. This is a real subjective determination. I already know some photographers who use it regularly but I just don't like it. I have seen images with a 300 mm f/2.8 with a 2X TC and they look great. But that lens is probably too expensive for me at this time.
I am going to rent the Tamron 150 - 600 mm f5/6.3 G2 when I get back from a trip and decide for myself. I just don't want to buy a Canon 400 mm f/5.6 prime lens and then rebuy the 1.4X TC. Just can't bring myself to do it but it might have been the right choice. Should have held on to the TC. LOL.
10-10-2019 05:38 PM
I have shot the same types of venue for the last 10 years using both versions of the 100-400 L IS with a 7D2 once it came out as wall as with the Sigma 150-600 C which I prefer over either of the 100-400 L's. The only thing I really don't like about the Sigma is that you can't zoom it's full range in a single motion. You need to let go & go some more once you've twisted the ring as far as you can. I always shoot hand held & am on the flight line for several hours at a time. You can check my results here quickly if you want. The camera & lens info is under each thumbnail & clicking on it gets the bigger image.
10-10-2019 08:01 PM
Your photos are excellent. Thing is, I think the Sigma lens at 6.3 lbs is just too heavy for me compared to my Canon lens (3.6 lbs). The Tamron at 4.4 lbs is reasonable and that's the lens I'll rent. I don't want to use a tripod except for low-light situations and I don't want to hold a heavy lens up to a wildlife subject like an osprey or bald eagle for a long time waiting for it to launch. That's basically my issue so I'm more interested in the lighted Tamron 150 - 600 mm G2.
Appreciate your comments and your photos.
10-10-2019 08:36 PM
"Reviews show that your 100-400 does very well with a 1.4X and your 7D2 will AF at this F8 aperture combination. Have you tried this combo yet to see how you like it before buying another lens?"
I think that is not the best gear combo. The 7D2 will have only one AF point, the center AF point. AF speed will take a very noticeable performance hit Your frame rate drops from 10fps, but I cannot say how much. The AF speed is bad enough that you may think that something is wrong with the camera. AF tracking takes hit because of the sluggish AF speed.
Both the 80D and the 6D2 easily outperform the 7D2 when it comes to focusing with an f/8 lens. They both offer 27 Af points, and no noticeable hit in AF speed. Just my observations.
10-10-2019 09:18 PM
The current version of the Tamron didn't exist when I bought the Sigma which was getting the better reviews back then. I really didn't expect it to AF fast enough for the RC planes but it did so I adjusted to it's weight. Whether the Tamron is better or not I'm quite happy with my lens & favor it over the Canon 100-400 unless I need the shorter reach or need to focus on something closer than the Sigma can. Either lens (150-600) is a bargain considering the IQ they deliver.
10-10-2019 09:55 PM
I have used the 7D2 with the 100 - 400 II and the 1.4X TC. I thought the images were a little soft, not horribly, but soft nonetheless. I therefore just use the 100 - 400 II without the TC. I have no issues whatsoever with the 100 - 400 II but just want more reach. You can see my photos at https://www.flickr.com/photos/hyalella/. If the subject is too far away and I crop too much, it loses details. I understand that and therefore want a lens that will give me more reach but provide the same IQ as my 100 - 400 II. (Note that I also shoot with a Sony RX 10 IV and, while I like the camera/lens, it is mainly a grab and go or travel camera).
As for the 80D, overeall I'll take the 7D2. I have owned two 80Ds, liked them, but like the 7D2 more.