Tamron 150-600mm f/6.3

[Sean Setters]

The Sigma Dock is only compatible with Global Vision Lenses - in other words, everything released after [and including] the 35mm f/1.4 Art lens.

[Joel Eade]

I would agree that many of the current 3rd party lenses are equal to or superior to Canon. image quality How well these will hold value long term is yet to be seen in most cases. The argument for purchasing Canon L lenses is that they do hold value very well especially when new versions are released. I have the 300/2.8L and the 500 f/4L. The current prices for used copies of these lenses is equal to or slightly more than I paid for them a few years ago. I don't know if the really good Sigma and Tamron will hold value as well long term. The much lower initial acquisition cost may offset those concerns for many folks.

[Joel Eade]

The super teles remain in their own category which is why I limited the scope to under 200mm focal length. With them the difference in photos is obvious which leaves the user to decide if the IQ gain is worth the price increase to them.

I would guess this may be the case for the most part but.... I bought Version 1 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM in 2008 new for $1600 and sold it in 2012 for $1500. So I used that lens 4 years for $100.

I believe the main reason is that the newer version came out at $2299 and that immediately boosted the price of the used version 1 lenses. Same scenario for the super-tele lenses and the 24-70mm f/2.8L

[Joel Eade]

I wonder how this lens compares with the Canon 200-400mm?

http://www.lensauthority.com/sigma-2...n-1001119-9-5/

[Sean Setters]

I wonder how this lens compares with the Canon 200-400mm?

http://www.lensauthority.com/sigma-2...n-1001119-9-5/

If you buy it, just have it sent to us first. We'll test it out for you. ;-)

[Kayaker72]

For those keeping up with the data coming out on the Tamron 150-600, AlanF on CR has a pretty good thread going where he is going through analyzing his. Of particular note, on page 5 he published his FoCal Aperture Sharpness data.

I've become convinced that this lens is optically a good alternative as long as you are shooting f/8-f/11 at 600 mm. But I've seen a couple of references (here and in the comments here) indicating that AF is likely an issue for BIF.

EDIT...just saw the link to DXO's review pop up.

[Busted Knuckles]

My wife called and let me know my lens showed up today - I will be playing/testing it on Saturday and post some shots, etc, etc.

[Kayaker72]

Great. I am excited to hear what you think.

[DavidEccleston]

Awesome. Can't wait to hear your report.

[Joel Eade]

EDIT...just saw the link to DXO's review pop up.

They gave it a similar score to the Canon 100-400 on the 5D MKIII but not as good on the 7D.

The overall scores on a 5D MKIII

Tamron 150-600 17
Canon 200-400 f/4 24
Canon 600 f/4 II 26
Canon 300 f/2.8 II 32