imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

You may or may not have useable AF - but your biggest challenge will be getting enough stabilization to quell motion/shake blur from the high magnification !

IMO, the best you can do is to optimize your native IQ through rigorous techniques and software and then CROP and use well applied pixel enlargement software if needed for larger printing/viewing.
.

Dillon

I find using a piece of 2 inch foam cushion simply laid on top of the tripod to cushion the lens works better than even a solid tripod when shooting with 150...600. Then I don't need a super expensive tripod. Even then I use the shutter remote.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

I have to agree with billnikon. There is no lens that will allow frame filling images of a small bird at 500 yards. Even if there, you probably would not want to use it even if you had lots of money and really strong arms to carry it. Picture quality is reduced by having a lot of air between your subject. Haze and irregular changes in the refractive index of air due to convection currents in the air reduce image quality. Even vibrations due to traffic might affect sharpness.

If you want to get frame filling images of wild game then you have to get close. Finding the great locations and the use of blinds are likely necessary. Even at Yellowstone those Bison near the road are remarkably far through the viewfinder. (and you don't want to get too close). Your 600mm lens would do a nice job in this situation.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

I wouldn’t use any other teleconverter with the 150-600 that the Sigma TC series.

https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lens-resources/teleconverter-compatibility

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

I disagree. The Sigma TC series teleconverters are specifically made for the Sigma 100-400 and 150-600

https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lens-resources/teleconverter-compatibility

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

VERY interesting !

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

My Sigma APO Tele Converter 1.4x EX DG. is not listed as compatible with the
150~600 C lens. The lens element mounts (would touch each other) and are too close together before the bayonet mounts can lock together. My converter is 'Dedicated' for use with the Sigma 150 f/2.8 Macro. Will take photograph if further proof is needed.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

Yes, ooo[s, I missed the fact that you were referring to the APO series. Sorry. Yours isn't but Sigma makes the TC-1401 and TC-2001 that do well with the 100-400 and 150-600.

Bankshot Loc: Henderson, NV, USA

Hi, just saw your post, so let's see if this will help you. Here are 3 shots taken with the first issue of the Tamron 150-600, now 5 or 6 years old. 0213 (top) was taken at 1/350, f8, ISO 640, 0215 (center) was taken at 1/150, f8, ISO 140, 0216 (bottom) was taken at 1/350, f8, ISO 140. 0218 was shot at 600mm with a Promaster Spectrum 1.7 teleconverter. It was a recommended one at the time I bought it, used like 10 years ago, and I have used it on and off on every Nikon I have since then with several different lenses. 0215 shot at 600mm, 0218shot at 150mm. Distance is about 175', autofocus tried to work with the teleconverter, but couldn't find focus, but image stabilization did work with it. These were shot with a D7000.
Bill

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

One thing I have learned using a generic TC with a lens is to not use the lens wide open. The results are just too soft. But to stop down a little, it works better.

Here is a shot at I guess at about 600 feet. Using the Tamron 150-600mm with a Kenko 1.4x. Exif data says that this is at f11 and 840mm. Was using a crop sensor Sony A57. Image sharpened in Topaz Sharpen AI. A much longer range shot than I should have been trying, but it did work.

(Download)

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

From the pictures posted, the 600mm shot is already soft. A teleconverter will only make matters worse since it magnifies a lens' shortcomings!

I've use both a 1.4x and 2x TC on a Sigma zoom. The 1.4x gave acceptable results. On the Sigma the 2x wasn't worth the cost. I've used the same two TC's with a Canon 24-105 L lens and the results were very good, of course the image quality off the 24-105 L lens is great by itself.

I also use a Sony 1.4x TC on a Sony FE 200-600 lens and it works very well BUT the image quality off the lens alone is superb to begin win.

So, it depends...

If you can, borrow or rent a TC before you put out the cash to buy.

bwa

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

You can put a teleconverter on your setup, but it will have disastrous results. I'm going to post a small segment of the 600mm picture you posted. It will show you how soft your lens is at 600mm (blurry). If you put any teleconverter on this lens at 600mm it will not improve your image. It will in fact double the blurriness of your pictures, if not more than double.

Keep in mind, I'm assuming that when you took these pictures, that you were as steady as you can possibly be; that you have good technique when using your setup at 600mm and that the blurriness isn't caused by camera shake. If this might be the case, then I suggest that you put your camera on a tripod, use those same settings on another subject similar to this one, and make sure that the camera is very steady and that you have good shutter pressing technique. If your pictures improve with practice keeping your camera very still at 600mm (not blurry any more) then the teleconverter might give you more reach and an acceptable image. If your pictures are still soft with an improved technique, then forget about putting a teleconverter on your setup and consider buying a better lens that gives you sharp images throughout it's zoom range.

(Download)

JohnH3 Loc: Auburn, AL

I have the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary and use it often. I have tried it with my Canon 1.4 teleconverter; however, I was not overly pleased with the results. The 1.4 works well on my Canon EF 70-300 and EF 100-400 L-Series lens, but still would rather not use them. I have never tried it with my 2.0 teleconverter. I am not positive, but I think the crop factor on your camera is 1.5 making 600 mm effectively already 900 mm on your camera.

Looking at your pictures, I would want to know your settings/technique, and the distance from the subjects. If handheld at 600 mm, your shutter speed needs to be fast. My rule (for me) is mm length x 1.5 = minimum shutter speed (note: that may need to be 900 mm x 1.5 on your crop frame camera? - not sure). This setting parameter is what I use for my Sigma 150-600. I am sure others would argue with that, but it works for me with this lens. Of course that generally means raising the ISO also, which I have learned to stop being afraid of doing. I commonly shoot at 12,500 ISO with good results even without removing noise in post processing with my EOS R, 5DMKIV, and 6DMKII. I can remove noise in post processing, but not motion blur. However, for a shot such as yours, I would use my tripod. I would still use as fast of a shutter speed as possible because of animal movement, which will also result in motion blur. In general and in my opinion, a faster shutter speed generally results in a sharper picture.

With that being said, your camera has 24.1 MP. That gives you room to crop. If you have a sharp image with good overall IQ, cropping should still result in a good picture quality. I think with the 150-600, you are likely to get better shots by starting with a sharp image and cropping rather than using a teleconverter. Be aware that using a 1.4 or 2.0 teleconverter will effectively add mm to focal length, which makes things monumentally more sensitive requiring an even higher shutter speed if handheld, etc. On a tripod, it should not make much difference.

I would suggest you try the technique I explained above and see if you are pleased with the results before spending money on a teleconverter. Another thing will long mm focal lengths that people new to using a long lens often overlook is the shallow depth of field you can get with 600 mm and a more open aperture. I once photographed an elk probably closer than I should have been when I first bought the lens. The way he was standing, his eyes were in focus, but not his rear. Just look at a DOF chart for longer focal lengths at different aperture settings. Of course, from the distance you shot the photos attached to this post, it would not be an issue.

I am no expert, but I have learned a lot about using my Sigma 150-600 lens by making many mistakes accompanied with some trial and error. I hope you find my comments helpful. Happy Easter and happy photographing!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Image quality will be far from perfect....

... AND adding a teleconverter will make for a very dark viewfinder to try to focus manually.

I use teleconverters (Canon 1.4X II and 2X II) with a number of lenses.

Weaker 1.4X teleconverters can be used successfully with more lenses than stronger 2X. It's just the difference in magnification. A 1.4X magnifies a lens' shortcomings a lot less than a 2X does.

There's also light lost to the teleconverter. An f/4 lens with a 1.4X "loses" one stop of light, to become an effective f/5.6 lens. The same f/4 lens with a 2X loses two stops and becomes an effective f/8. Many cameras have a limit, how dark a lens they can still autofocus. Virtually all can handle f/5.6... some can handle f/8.... very few can handle less than that, f/11 or smaller effective aperture.

A Tamron 150-600mm f/5 to f/6.3 "becomes" an effective 210-840mm f/7.1 to f/10 when a 1.4X is added to it. Or, the same lens becomes an effective 300-1200mm f/10 to f/13... which almost no camera is able to autofocus (and makes for a very dim viewfinder to try to manually focus).

There are some exceptions... for example, I know the Canon EOS R mirrorless camera is able to autofocus as small as f/11 equivalent aperture and its electronic viewfinder can "brighten the view" so you can actually see what you're doing. I imagine some other mirrorless can do similar. But it still doesn't solve any image quality compromise. And autofocus may not be as swift as usual even under ideal conditions. It might slow, hunt or even fail to focus, depending upon other factors such as ambient light conditions, atmospheric effects and even subject contrast and detail.

I'll use the 1.4X with 135mm, 300mm f/4, 300mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4 and 100-400mm zoom... and maybe 70-200mm if I absolutely can't avoid it. (Doesn't work as well with the 70-200s I have, works better with newer ones).

I only use the 2X with 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 lenses. Those hold up well with it. Everything else goes to mush, with more loss of image quality than I'm willing to accept! (Some newer lenses work better with 2X.... but it's still a rather short list.)

The best solution.... get closer to your subjects! Your images will be much better for it. With wildlife, it might mean some planning an patience... setting up a blind and waiting hidden in it for hours until the critters get close enough to take some shots. Look for opportunities where the wildlife is more acclimated to people and will let you get closer. Hungry animals intent on feeding may be more approachable, too.

I was able to get within 30, 35 feet of this guy, he was so busy feeding....



I used a 300mm f/4 lens with 1.4X teleconverter for the above shot (on a full frame camera, so roughly equivalent to a 260mm setting of your zoom on your crop sensor camera, without any teleconverter). The 300mm lens I used is image stabilized (as is your 150-600mm), but I still used a monopod to help steady the shot.

After several months of frequent encounters, this young coyote was so accustomed to me that she let me take her portrait with a 135mm lens (roughly equal to the shortest setting of your zoom)...



The mama ground squirrel and her baby below live in a park and are so accustomed to people I just sat, waited and took multiple shots with my 300mm lens... no teleconverter:



I sat in my car, using it as a blind, to get shots of this turkey with a 300mm lens (on full frame, so roughly 200mm equiv. on your camera)...



During Spring and much of the Summer, the heron below shows up every day about the same time to hunt for food in a field at a friend's ranch... very predictable. Same with the waxwing, a flock of them show up every Winter to feed on the berries of some trees. I've photographed them several times, over the years. The redtail hawk was more opportunistic. I was shooting some scenics when I noticed it hunting nearby. It was so busy it ignored me and I was able to take a number of photos of it, over about 45 minutes time. All three were shot with 300mm lenses (on crop cameras, like yours):



The most valuable "tool" in a wildlife photographer's toolbox is patience! Learning critters habits and planning around them are some other useful things.

In general, teleconverters work better with prime lenses (i.e, a fixed, single focal length).... instead of zooms like your 150-600mm. There are exceptions, of course. I finally got around to testing using a 1.4X on my Canon 100-400mm II lens.... and was pleasantly surprised how well the combo worked. These aren't my greatest shots, but are enlargeable to compare the image quality... 1st image is the 100-400 with 1.4X, second images is the lens alone, without the TC:

(Download)


(Download)

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

I use the Sigma TC-1401 with Sigma's 100-400 and 150-600 attached to Canon 6d2 and 7d2. There is noticeable but subtle softness with all combinations but definitely still usable. I tried a 2x TC once..... horrible.... no mas.....