Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

Have the Tamron 18-400mm f3.5-6.3 and I am very happy with the results AFTER Tuning all 24 points using the Tap-In, but new they are $650 and they are hard to find used, but usually around $500, which is still 2 1/2 to over 3x what the camera is worth.

Both of these shots were taken with a D500 and Tamron 18-400mm f/5-6.3 at 400mm f/6.3 at Galveston State Park, Galveston Tx, January 2019.

(Download)


(Download)

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

The Tamron 150-600 G2 is as good as you can get for your camera.
Fast focus, superbly sharp and great reach for wildlife.
At 150mm you get excellent landscapes.
I have a smaller reach 100-400mm that works great for landscapes.
The 600mm gets you there for that shy elusive wildlife.
It has no peer for your camera.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

and can lift/hold.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

and control/manage !

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Both are good, but lack the fine detail that better glass provides. The first two images below are from a Sony RX10M3 or M4, a bridge camera that has a great lens and only a 1" sensor:

_DSC0061-DSC-RX10M3--(28-11-17) high res by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_DSC3622-DSC-RX10M4--(17-12-18) by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

And these are from a 150-600 Sigma Sport on a D810. After trying out a Tamron 150-600 G2, I find it optically comparable to the heavier and more costly Sigma - and it would be my recommendation over the 100-400 lenses or the Tamron 18-400, which is not close to being in the same class. I use the Sigma out of the box - no fine tuning of the lens or the camera.

_DSC1666-NIKON D810-3007990-(14-10-17)-Edit by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_DSC0984-NIKON D810-3007990-(22-09-17) by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_DSC3927-NIKON D810-3007990-(14-05-19)-Edit by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

MauiMoto Loc: Hawaii

All my Nikon lenses require 0 or +1 on a different body. My Tamron required numbers + or - 15 or more with no pattern. Ended up sending it to Tamron and it still required + or - a few digits here and there, and it's only tuned for one body. I don't see how you could tune it yourself on a 3200 without driving yourself crazy. You would have to send it to Tamron with the body, possibly more than once. It is a good lens for the money.
Also, that big lens will drain that little 3200 battery very fast using both af and vc, you will definitely need more batteries.

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

Wow Gene those are wonderful images. Love your work man !

Thanks for sharing them.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Since I never shoot in a downpour, my Nikon 200-500 has never needed front coating or weather sealing. Even though my Nikkor 500 mm 5.6 is weather proof I still carry a plastic bag just in case of any rain.
PS. Since my Nikkor 200-500 5.6 has never needed any focus tuning, I did not have to make 15 adjustment points. Boy, what a waste of time. I am so glad my Nikon lenses do not require ANY fine tuning.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Thanks!

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

That is my situation as well. My lenses do not require any AF offset adjustment on any of my bodies. The offset is NOT a substitute for a proper tuning, and in my experience, if the body and the lens are both within spec, the results from using live view's CDAF will be equivalent to using the viewfinder's PDAF. But many here believe in the magic of AF Fine tune. I have one lens that can be tuned independently of the camera, a Sigma Sport 150-600, but I found that on 5 different bodies it did not require adjustment. But adjustment is sometimes necessary. I had a D800 that I bought from Nikon as a refurb and it was definitely off. It had a shutter count of 12 images, but no matter what lens I put on it, it would not PDAF focus correctly. I took the body and one of my lenses to Nikon, they wanted to fix both the lens and the body and I vehemently objected. The lens was fine on the other bodies, and no lens focused correctly on the suspect D800, so adjusting the lens was completely pointless. I prevailed, they adjusted "communications parameters" on the body, and it was perfect - just like the other bodies.

So, if a lens that does not have the ability to be adjusted, and it is clearly a lens issue, it can and should be properly calibrated. A 200-500, like every other Nikkor lens must be adjusted by Nikon. The lenses from Tamron and Sigma that use a dock can be fine tuned by the owner. On the Sport I did fine tune the behavior of the stabilization, and tracking accuracy vs acquisition - using the doc, but focus was fine.

I don't think the dock is a waste of time, especially if there is an issue with the lens. Having a camera that doesn't have a tuning adjustment makes it a little harder to diagnose an AF problem, and certainly limits options should something go awry in the field.

I have been caught in rain, snow, and used my camera on a windy day at the beach and experienced spray near waterfalls. I would NEVER take a lens/camera that did not have weather sealing. If you are, as you have described yourself, a "fair weather photographer" - I'd say you may be missing out on some great image shots. I suspect if you ever go to Ireland, Scotland or England, you'd probably leave your gear at your place of lodging - it rains there all the time. I don't baby my gear, but I am careful with it, and I love marginal weather - it makes for some very interesting shots.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I have too many lenses and too many bodies to bother with body-based fine tuning. If you are only seeing a +/-1 adjustment requirement - well - statistically, that is normal. If you take 100 pictures of a static subject, using PDAF to focus, and defocusing after each shot, you are going to see that 2% to 5% of you images will be out of focus. That is normal, and if it is within -2 to +2, that is also normal. If you are seeing a wider range then something is wrong and must be addressed. With such small focus errors, in the real world there are numerous other factors that will create softness in an image.

MauiMoto Loc: Hawaii

That's what I'm saying, all my Nikon glass, except for one 70-200mm f2.8e which I had to exchange, has been excellent. The Tamron was a pita to calibrate, unless you enjoy that sort of thing. It was fun at first but got old pretty quickly.

coullone Loc: Paynesville, Victoria, Australia

If you want it right focus manually - you know what is the point you want to focus on - BUT for 95% of the time the autofocus is quite adequate.
Important shots I autofocus then manually focus if I am not really happy. As my sight deteriorates I rely more on the autofocus.
Nikon D7200
Olympus M10 Mk 2
Nikon D3400
Pentax K10D the best anti shake of all the above.
Leica R8 and about 20 'vintage' cameras from 110 to 122 (postcard size Negs).
Lenses from 10mm to 500mm.
All work and take reasonable photos main problem is the photographer, I was good between 10 and 60 but now...

BMWright

Taken with Tamron 150-600mm G2 on a Nikon D7100... no fine tuning.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Taken with the Nikon 200-500 on a Nikon D500, NEVER any fine tuning on any Nikon lens.