At the risk of repeating myself across multiple channels, I hope Tamron releases an X mount version of their amazing 50-400. That's the ideal focal length and size for my work and photography pursuits.
I use this lens every day on my old XT2 for wildlife. The Fuji 150-600 at f8 is too low for some of the places I shoot, so the Tamron is OK at f6.7. The 0.6m at 150mm is great for butterflies and 750mm equivalent is good for birds. Great 'one lens does all'.
After a bit over a year of fairly frequent use, my Fuji 100-400mm zoom has gone from being a bit sticky on the zoom to practically jammed. I've left it at 400mm and using it like a 400mm telephoto for now. (most bird shots I was at 400mm anyway). I'm pretty sad about it. I love the lens. I'll send it to Fuji for a service at some point. I'm really tempted by the Tamron 150-500mm. Not the reach of the new Fuji 150-600mm, but the Tamron is faster. Looking forward to your review of the 150-600mm
Ye get it to Fujifilm and don't accept no/high fee!!! If not see how this lens works out for you, if you can try it out somewhere. Oh yes, I'm almost done with the bulk of the recording for the 150-600 video!
Tempting but I have set my heart on the XF 150-600 and at present shooting with the XF100-400+TC1.4x I am certainly at no disadvantage (max 560mm at f8). One thing I am surprised about is that the Tamron at 1725g is actually heavier than the Fuji which is 1605g according to the specs I have seen. Even 125 is a relief for those of us with old arms! But there is a distinct price advantage which would benefit the budget of many shooters.
I agree. Actually I'm just about to record my summary for my xf150-600 video and I'm definitely mentioning this point. As much as I prefer the reach, I do prefer the weight and f stop but not sure it's a huge problem for me yet especially how I use the lens. But, I don't lug it around as much as most would.
Got one to replace my XF 100-400 a couple of weeks ago, and I'm not sure how to feel about it. In terms of image quality, wide open at 400-500 it's as sharp as the XF 100-400 is stopped down to 7.1, so that's great. The thing about this lens that really annoys me though is the image stabilization, it's basically non-existent, and I fully understand why they only had the confidence to call it "vibration compensation" it's awful. I feel like the Tamron lens just isn't working with the IBIS of fuji cameras. As soon as there's a better option, I'll sell the tamron, that's for sure, but right now sadly there really isn't much to choose from and the XF 150-600 is way too expensive for what it is. Sony has a 200-600 with an aperture of f/6.3 at 600mm, and it costs only 1650€ where I live, it blows my mind that fuji thinks they can charge 400€ more for an aps-c f8 lens.
I didn't have as bad a time with stabilisation but I'd agree with you that it's not quite there. Just tested the XF and while f8 and £2K it's not bad at all.
@@DamianBrown I just shot a rabbit with ISO 12.800 at f/6.7 yesterday evening, with the XF 150-600 I would've been either out of luck or had to shoot at like 1/50th of a second. I'm hoping for sigmas 150- or 60-600 still, but for now the Tamron is alright.
@@Yupthereitism I just bought the new Nikon 180-600 and the Z8 to replace all my fuji wildlife gear. I'd say f/6.7 is alright for wildlife, even on APS-C, but certainly not ideal. The Tamron is a decent lens imo.
I would be interested in buying this lens but the weight puts me off. I can carry my X-S20 + 1.4X TC + 70-300mm all day, but would need to be on steroids to carry the Tamron.
Will this work with the fuji 1.4x extender? I have that with the fuji 7-300 and it works well without knocking IQ, although only on bright days when you don't need a 1/1000 to stop birds!
Great question. I know the sigma150-600 with fringer adapter can but this one, native of course, I don't know because I don't have the TC to test but I have read online from one user that it doesn't fit.
I absolutely understand the price because its alot cheaper than anything else has to offer but sadly your average consumer doesnt really have a grand to throw away at somrthing thats abit of a one trick pony. I wish I did though
See, for me it's one of those lenses that obviously isn't for everyone (the average consumer) and the nature of the lens means the price is what it is. I'm the same, I couldn't justify it for myself considering I don't spend that much time shooting this kinda stuff but those that do would see it as a great investment, of course if they have the money to begin with.
At the risk of repeating myself across multiple channels, I hope Tamron releases an X mount version of their amazing 50-400. That's the ideal focal length and size for my work and photography pursuits.
Love it. I have zero issues in seeing this request here 🤩
It will be a great addition to the Xmount system
@@DamianBrown hahaha thanks man!:)
@@angeloplayforone 😊
I use this lens every day on my old XT2 for wildlife. The Fuji 150-600 at f8 is too low for some of the places I shoot, so the Tamron is OK at f6.7. The 0.6m at 150mm is great for butterflies and 750mm equivalent is good for birds. Great 'one lens does all'.
Thanks for this!!
After a bit over a year of fairly frequent use, my Fuji 100-400mm zoom has gone from being a bit sticky on the zoom to practically jammed. I've left it at 400mm and using it like a 400mm telephoto for now. (most bird shots I was at 400mm anyway).
I'm pretty sad about it. I love the lens. I'll send it to Fuji for a service at some point.
I'm really tempted by the Tamron 150-500mm. Not the reach of the new Fuji 150-600mm, but the Tamron is faster. Looking forward to your review of the 150-600mm
Ye get it to Fujifilm and don't accept no/high fee!!! If not see how this lens works out for you, if you can try it out somewhere.
Oh yes, I'm almost done with the bulk of the recording for the 150-600 video!
Tempting but I have set my heart on the XF 150-600 and at present shooting with the XF100-400+TC1.4x I am certainly at no disadvantage (max 560mm at f8). One thing I am surprised about is that the Tamron at 1725g is actually heavier than the Fuji which is 1605g according to the specs I have seen. Even 125 is a relief for those of us with old arms!
But there is a distinct price advantage which would benefit the budget of many shooters.
I agree. Actually I'm just about to record my summary for my xf150-600 video and I'm definitely mentioning this point. As much as I prefer the reach, I do prefer the weight and f stop but not sure it's a huge problem for me yet especially how I use the lens. But, I don't lug it around as much as most would.
@@DamianBrown Looking forward to your review of the 150-600.
It’s so dark though. Everything will be grainy
Got one to replace my XF 100-400 a couple of weeks ago, and I'm not sure how to feel about it. In terms of image quality, wide open at 400-500 it's as sharp as the XF 100-400 is stopped down to 7.1, so that's great. The thing about this lens that really annoys me though is the image stabilization, it's basically non-existent, and I fully understand why they only had the confidence to call it "vibration compensation" it's awful. I feel like the Tamron lens just isn't working with the IBIS of fuji cameras.
As soon as there's a better option, I'll sell the tamron, that's for sure, but right now sadly there really isn't much to choose from and the XF 150-600 is way too expensive for what it is. Sony has a 200-600 with an aperture of f/6.3 at 600mm, and it costs only 1650€ where I live, it blows my mind that fuji thinks they can charge 400€ more for an aps-c f8 lens.
I didn't have as bad a time with stabilisation but I'd agree with you that it's not quite there. Just tested the XF and while f8 and £2K it's not bad at all.
@@DamianBrown I just shot a rabbit with ISO 12.800 at f/6.7 yesterday evening, with the XF 150-600 I would've been either out of luck or had to shoot at like 1/50th of a second.
I'm hoping for sigmas 150- or 60-600 still, but for now the Tamron is alright.
It’s too dark
@@Yupthereitism I just bought the new Nikon 180-600 and the Z8 to replace all my fuji wildlife gear. I'd say f/6.7 is alright for wildlife, even on APS-C, but certainly not ideal. The Tamron is a decent lens imo.
I would be interested in buying this lens but the weight puts me off. I can carry my X-S20 + 1.4X TC + 70-300mm all day, but would need to be on steroids to carry the Tamron.
Ah you can do it :D
Will this work with the fuji 1.4x extender? I have that with the fuji 7-300 and it works well without knocking IQ, although only on bright days when you don't need a 1/1000 to stop birds!
Great question. I know the sigma150-600 with fringer adapter can but this one, native of course, I don't know because I don't have the TC to test but I have read online from one user that it doesn't fit.
I can confirm it doesn’t
Can you make another video going into detail regarding video and the alleged near parfocal capability you mentioned?
When I get the lens in again I'll have a look! Thanks!
Comparing this to the Nikkor 200-500mm f5.6 with the fringer adapter on Fuji? Image quality and autofocus in particular?
Good idea, if I get chance I'll try!
What do you prefer, the sigma 100-400 or this one?. Thanks!
This at a push
Very cool. Looks like a fun lens! ❤
Oh yesss
I absolutely understand the price because its alot cheaper than anything else has to offer but sadly your average consumer doesnt really have a grand to throw away at somrthing thats abit of a one trick pony. I wish I did though
See, for me it's one of those lenses that obviously isn't for everyone (the average consumer) and the nature of the lens means the price is what it is. I'm the same, I couldn't justify it for myself considering I don't spend that much time shooting this kinda stuff but those that do would see it as a great investment, of course if they have the money to begin with.