Sonny and I are discussing something. You don't like it? Upper left corner, click "unwatch". That's not hard to do is it?

And what I posted earlier might be useful to some.

Jim D

That may be true, but look at the topic. All 3?

As for picking when to shoot I would love too but the birds don't listen to the same weather reports as we do. I worked in bad weather also so being out in it doesn't really bother me much.

Jim D

Yeah, I guess it is. Just want to make members aware that there are 3 lenses in that range. Yes, it is more expensive but there are good reasons for that. Some, like myself and Carter feel it is worth it mainly due to the weather sealing but there are other reasons for the cost such as the elements.

Jim D

Some more comparisons between the Tamron and the sport version.

I got my Sigma 150 – 600 mm lens today. So far, just a quick glance, I am impressed! Below are listed just a few changes I am seeing that are different from the Tamron 150 – 600 mm.

The lens itself is a year newer than the Tamron.

Tamron minimum aperture is an f32 – F 40. Sigmas minimum aperture is a fixed F-22

Tamron has 20 elements, Sigma uses 24

The Tamron diameter is 95 mm, Sigma is 105 mm so the Sigma will allow more light gathering.

Tamron uses 13 groups, Sigma uses 16

Minimum focus is only 4 inches difference, Tamron being 106 inches and the Sigma is 102 inches. Not really much difference.

One of the things I noticed right away was the weight difference. This Tamron lens weighs 4.3 pounds, the Sigma lens weighs 6.31 pounds, just a shade over 2 pounds heavier. This is due to the amount of metal used in the Sigma lens. The Sigma lens is about an inch and a quarter longer and fully extended to the 600 mm position.

The Sigma is also weather sealed and the Tamron is not.

So far it looks like the Sigma is winning. The truth will be when I get to take some photos with it. Hopefully I can shoot with it tomorrow, but if not I will shoot with it Friday.

Jim D

I don't think it should matter. It is the lens focusing that activates it I believe. If you have the switch turned to on when the lens focuses it should work.

Jim D

As long as your SS is twice as fast as your focal length turn it off. ay you are using a 400mm lens shoot at a SS of 800 and you will be fine. I use the same rule of thumb if hand holding.

Are you using Canon lenses? If so you should read this:

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/lenses/image_stabilisation.do

Jim D

Here is a link to their web site:

http://www.neatimage.com/index.html?gb1

I have used it as a stand alone but prefer using it with PSE. It can be used as a plug-in from other programs also. Available for windows and Mac.

Below is an original and then with noise reduced. What I like about it is I can choose the area I want to reduce noise on instead of the whole photo.

Jim D

(Download)

After a few seconds using noise reduction on the sky only.

(Download)

I use it from time to time but it is not my favorite program for noise reduction. If I have an excessive amount of noise I go to Photoshop elements and use a plug-in made my neat image called reduce noise.

First I use the quick selection tool and mark what I want to sharpen or save. I then right-click the mouse click on inverse, and then I open up the filter called reduce noise. Once it is open I can reduces much noise from the background as I want and at the same time sharpen the image I want to save. It does an excellent job and never interferes with the original section of the photo I want to say sharpen. This is the best noise reduction program I have found.

Jim D

It is a nice tripod but before you make a finial decision take a look at this thread:

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-295385-1.html

This is an excellent tripod for less than a third of your cost. This leaves you about $700.00 to pick a head, or heads, you would like.

Jim D

Rich,

There is more than one way to look at things. Could it be that their equipment is so good they don't see the need to have a warranty on it? They know their equipment is going to last and won't need repairs. Could be that Tamron figures it will take six years to get all their problem straightened out?

Like I said, there's more than one way to look at things. LOL!

I figure if a lens lasts for a few months without any problems there's no reason it shouldn't last a long time unless I get stupid and drop it. Or my dog jumps on it like what happened to my 100 – 400 mm lens. LOL! She cost me over $300 that day.

Jim D

I understand and hope you didn't take my comment as being ignorant. It wasn't meant to be. I just want everybody to understand that I am comparing the Tamron to the sport lens and not the contemporary version.

I have seen very little written about the contemporary. Just now starting to see people are getting it. Knowing Sigma's reputation I wouldn't be surprised to see the contemporary is the better of the two between it and Tamron. It will be interesting to see what the final outcome is

Jim D

Since you know the difference between the two Sigma lenses you shouldn't have to ask which one I was using. I clearly stated that one of the big advantages with its weather sealing so I had to be using the sport. Not only that if you looked at the link I gave and checked the date you would've seen it was mid-January and the contemporary wasn't released yet.

I realize I was comparing a lens that was thousand dollars more but it was the only Sigma released at the time. The contemporary was out when I bought mine. What I did was compare the two to see if the Sigma was worth the money. To me it is. To some others it may not be.

I also stated that the sigmas IQ was better than the Tamron but not by much. Because I do a lot of outdoor shooting the weather sealing was the big thing for me.

Jim D

I own both lenses and prefer the Sigma. It is the better made of the two lenses and has better IQ but not by much. One of the big advantages of it is it is weather sealed. I listed some things that are different between the two lenses and you can see it here:

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-276171-1.html

It is much heavier which is a disadvantage if you plan on handholding a lot. If you're going to use a tripod that won't matter much. Are you going to be using it outside in bad weather on occasion? If so the weather sealing is a big plus.

Here are a couple of shots taken with the Sigma at 600 mm all uncropped.

Jim D

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Thank you. I don't think I want to be able to eat that way, looks to much like work!

Jim D

Your welcome, and thanks for the compliment and words of encouragement. Really appreciated! I am quite pleased with this combo.

Jim D