Tamron 150-600 mark 1& 2: Does anyone have experience with both the original & the 2nd version of this lens? My question really is is the upgrade worth the expense? I've had some...

saidel42 Loc: NJ

Does anyone have experience with both the original & the 2nd version of this lens?
My question really is is the upgrade worth the expense? I've had some success with the original but have noticed a few quirks with my Nikon D7100 wrt focussing continuous mode.
Thanks for any comments and especially about the subtle "feel" difference.

agillot

the original one had a softness issue past 550 mm, not on the G2.still a nice lens .

dandev Loc: Enumclaw, WA

I have the G1 - and am interested in the feedback as well.

KeEdNel

Yes. I have had both versions in Canon Mount. Version 2 is much sharper and will focus in lower light then Version 1 did. I find it performs so well that I have it mounted continuously on a Manfrotto head and tripod with wheels so I can roll it to where I need it to photograph birds near my home.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

I had the Tamron G1 for a very short time, during which it quit working. Took it back to the dealer and bought a Sigma Sport which I found much better. Had the Sigma for two years and decided that these lenses were just not for me and went back to my, much heavier, primes. Best of luck.

wwright Loc: Tucson

I just purchased the version 2, but have not had experience with the version 1. What I did do prior to purchasing was rent from lensrental. I tried the Tamron 18 -400 and the 200 -600; renting for 10 days and trying various settings. While it did add 200 dollars to the overall purchase price, I knew what I was buying was going to work for me.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

I'm a hoarder. I already had a Sigma 150-500, Nikon 200-500 and Tamron 150-600 G1, and still bought the Tamron G2 at the same time as my Nikon D850.

I was fortunate that my brick and mortar store had display models of the D850 and the G2 Tammy, so I had the opportunity to try them together.

I won't go into detail about the specs ( you can Google that), but the G1 and G2 are like distant cousins! The G2 is a COMPLETELY redesigned do over. Yes, it's worth the extra cash. My only complaint is that it's f/5.6-6.3, but a faster lens (f/2.8?) would be too heavy to hand hold and way out of my price range.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

OddJobber wrote:

I'm a hoarder. I already had a Sigma 150-500, Nik... (show quote)

I believe that Nikon is working on a 400/4. Be very interested in seeing the cost and weight. I know their newest 300/4 is amazing as I have owned one since release. Best of luck.

lowbone

My experience with the G2 is that it is built better, has nicer features ( locking at various focal lengths, built in arca mount ) but after macro adjusting the G1 and G2 I found the sharpness at the long end to be about the same. I also found that the 1.4 teleconverter that Tamron advertises as being compatible with the G2 to be a figment of Tamron’s imagination as the lens would not AF with the teleconverter in all but the brightest light and when it did it was inaccurate. I sent the lens back to B&H and sold my G1. I wound up buying the Sigma 150-600 as it seemed better in every way except for image stabilization.

SafariGuy

saidel42 wrote:

Does anyone have experience with both the original & the 2nd version of this lens?
My question really is is the upgrade worth the expense? I've had some success with the original but have noticed a few quirks with my Nikon D7100 wrt focussing

I have version #1 and am not happy with it all and just shipped it back to Tamron with a ‘promise’ from them it will be fixed this time or replaced...I’m hoping for the latter. I’ve had it for 3 years and have only a handful of acceptable shots. The lens from Tamron is a good lens....Mine happens to be a lemon. I borrowed my friends lens a number of times and loved the result.

Bill Golden Loc: Briarcliff NY

I have both. I kept both and use them on my Canon 7D mark ii, 5D mark iii and my 6D. The G2 has several improvements. It focuses faster and seems sharper especially beyond 500 mm. It has a locking mechanism for all zoom lengths but I don't even use it because the zoom is tighter than the G1 so there is no lens creep. I did have to send the first one back to Tamron twice for them to calibrate it. They finally got it right. The G2 does not seem to need any calibration but mine came with a device to self-calibrate it if needed. I kept both because although the G2 is better, my G is perfectly fine up to about 500 mm.

Clapperboard

I have the G2 version and love it. I had a short use of the Sigma Sport 150/600 and in my opinion the extra weight makes it almost unusable. The Tamron G2 has some facilities that are not available on the Sigma. I have taken about 15 thousand shots with the lens. The failed shots are my fault. Keeping the focus point on small birds in flight is often difficult. The focus speed and quality of the shots when I do my part are outstanding. I have other 400mm. lenses and 200mm. lenses and extenders that I can use but of course none of these let me get a max. aperture as wide as 6.3 at 600mm.
I would recommend G2 version without hesitation.

whitehall Loc: Canada

both my wife and I had the. G1 and upgraded to G2 She shoots Nikon 500 I use a Canon 7dmkii. substantial improvement paricularly on the Canon. she was happier than I with the G1 ( but the Nikon shooters are easy to please- just kidding!) I also purchased the Tamron 1.4 converter. While it is a better choice than trying to use the Canon converters ( which can actually damage the Tamron as they are designed for specific Canon lenses) I am not convinced that the extra 1.4 is worth the result. As expected focus is slow, but more importantly the IQ is wanting. Tripod or a MP is a must. Any other experiences with the 1.4?

whitehall Loc: Canada

both my wife and I had the. G1 and upgraded to G2 She shoots Nikon 500 I use a Canon 7dmkii. substantial improvement paricularly on the Canon. she was happier than I with the G1 ( but the Nikon shooters are easy to please- just kidding!) I also purchased the Tamron 1.4 converter. While it is a better choice than trying to use the Canon converters ( which can actually damage the Tamron as they are designed for specific Canon lenses) I am not convinced that the extra 1.4 is worth the result. As expected focus is slow, but more importantly the IQ is wanting. Tripod or a MP is a must. Any other experiences with the 1.4?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

saidel42 wrote:

Does anyone have experience with both the original & the 2nd version of this lens?
My question really is is the upgrade worth the expense? I've had some success with the original but have noticed a few quirks with my Nikon D7100 wrt focussing continuous mode.
Thanks for any comments and especially about the subtle "feel" difference.

IMO, the G1 is best used on a crop frame camera to 500mm only. The G2 becomes more valuable on a full frame body where the better performance at full 600mm is absolutely needed.

..