Canon has FINALLY released a full frame mirrorless camera – the Canon EOS R. They have also launched a new lens mount – the RF. While many people advocated for Canon to retain the EF mount, early development for the platform shows that the RF mount may be the most exciting component thus far, with both better and also more unique lenses either launching or in development for the platform. After reviewing the Canon EOS R, I am convinced that the best thing about the camera thus far are the exciting new RF mount lenses. The camera shows great potential for focus, with incredibly fast focus speeds with the new RF 24-105mm f/4L IS. The new RF 24-105L kit lens is a clear improvement over previous 24-105mm lenses, and the combination of camera and lens produces beautiful images. This quick text review is a companion to my video episodes on this lens to give you a sense of whether or not you should buy the RF 24-105L as either a standalone lens or in kit with an EOS R series camera.
If you prefer to watch your reviews (and my video review is a little more thorough than this quick text review), I recommend that you take a look at my full video review here!
Canon RF 24-105L IS USM Build and Handling
I recommend that you take a look at this video review to get the details on the build and handling of the RF 24-105L.
The new RF lenses represent a nice evolution of classic Canon “L-series” design. I felt that the series needed an update as it had retained essentially the same look for decades. A couple of details stand out to me and should be mentioned here. First of all, there are some nice cosmetic updates, including a unique molded transition area near the lens mount that has a platinum colored accent section and also some artful contours where the black section emerges from the the platinum portion.
What’s also worth noting is that this design has both form and function, as it allows for adequate room for one’s knuckles between lenses and the grip – something that the a7R3 often cannot say. You can see from the photo above that there is a nice amount of space between the lens and the grip. When I hold the 24-105mm combination (a substantial lens), nothing is touching or rubbing. I actually think that Sony should make the next generation of a7 cameras a little wider to add a few extra millimeters of room in between the lens and the grip.
There is a useful new physical control in the addition of a “control ring” to RF mount lenses. This is located near the front of the lens on all current RF lenses and it can be assigned a variety of different values. A couple practical ones to me include Aperture (you can use it essentially like an aperture ring) and (my current choice) Exposure Compensation. Unlike most mirrorless cameras, the EOS R has no dedicated Exposure Compensation dial…and I miss it. Mapping this to the Control Ring makes up for what is missing on the camera, which leads me to another point: you’re going to want that Control Ring adapter for your EF lenses! I felt limited when I used the adapter without it, and loved the additional functionality when I used the control ring adapter with my EF glass. The control ring works well on the RF 24-105L, providing a convenient way to control either lens or camera functionality. It has a different texture to the ring along with a slightly different visual look.
The RF 24-105L is on the large side of medium. It is (D x L) 3.29 x 4.22″ / 83.5 x 107.3 mm. This is, however, a little smaller than the Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS II, which is (D x L) 3.29 x 4.65″ / 83.5 x 118 mm. So, roughly an extra half inch (10mm) shorter than the EF version, though the two lenses share the same diameter and filter size (77mm). The RF lens is a fair bit lighter, however, at 1.54 lb / 700 g compared to 1.75 lb / 795 g. What’s interesting, however, is that I found the EF 24-105L II “plasticky-feeling” in the hand, but I found the RF 24-105L more substantial feeling. The Sony 24-105mm F4 G lens is a little longer (113.3mm) than the RF lens, but it is also a little lighter (663g).
Despite having a fairly long barrel, the RF 24-105L has a fairly “busy” section where the rings reside. The zoom ring is closest to the lens mount (about halfway up the lens barrel), followed by the MF ring, and then the aforementioned control ring. If I have any complaint about the ergonomics, it is that these rings are a little too close together, and it could be easy to grab the wrong one. Canon has dealt with this in part by giving them all something unique. The zoom ring is wider, has a different rib pattern, and is contoured with the latter portion curving into a wider section of the lens barrel. It has a very unique feel. The manual focus ring is the least distinguished, but does have a tighter rib pattern. There is a little gap before the control ring adapter, and it has a completely different texture and tactile feel.
The RF 24-105L has two switches, an AF/MF switch and on ON/OFF for the IS (Image stabilization) system. These switches are small but definite and one shouldn’t have an issue with inadvertently clicking them.
The IS in the RF 24-105L is rated at 5 stops (an impressively high figure), and works very well. It goes on and off in a near imperceptible fashion and makes little noise in operation. I was able to get nicely repeatable results handholding 1/8th second shots at 105mm, so it definitely works well. The shot below is one of ten that all look pretty much the same:
The RF 24-105L has a weather-sealed design that make it useful in the elements. All in all, this is a nicely designed lens that manages to shave a little weight compared to the EF version along with adding additional functionality.
If you want to see more images of the lens itself, visit the Lens Image Gallery.
Canon RF 24-105L IS USM Autofocus
Autofocus with the native RF 24-105mm F/4L IS is brilliantly fast. It’s just there, instantly. Canon claims that this is the fastest autofocusing combination in the world, and it’s hard to doubt. Canon pioneered the Nano-USM technology employed in this lens nearly two years ago with the EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM lens. I was impressed with it then, and remain impressed now. Autofocus is near instant, extremely quiet, and accuracy is nicely reliable.
Canon’s Eye-AF (Pupil-AF in Canon speak) isn’t as sophisticated yet as Sony’s, but that didn’t stop the RF 24-105L from delivering very consistent results in a variety of situations.
Canon also claims new levels of sensitivity in low light for the EOS R. With the RF 50mm F1.2L they claim that it is sensitive down to EV-6, which is essentially a dark room. With a more pedestrian F2.8 lens, however, that should still be somewhere close to EV-4, which is less than moonlight. Suffice it to say that there are few situations you won’t be able to focus the lens in. Even with the 24-105’s F4 aperture, I had very good performance in low light situations. This shot, for example, I took at 1/30th second at ISO 40,000, which is dark enough that it would have taken a 13 second exposure at ISO 100, and the camera focused near instantly (and did so perfectly accurately):
While I don’t love focus by wire manual focus lenses (focus input on the MF ring is routed through the focus motor to move anything, so you don’t directly focus the lens manually), the RF 24-105L is fairly mannerly. The EOS R body has a number of effective MF aids that enable you to get very reliable results when manually focusing.
All in all, there is great news on the autofocus front. The RF 24-105L is a great autofocus lens, with blazing fast speed and good accuracy. Even better, the nature of mirrorless focus systems means that you don’t need to worry about AFMA or calibrating autofocus. Autofocus accuracy is not dependent on fine-tuning focus, so the lens will deliver perfectly reliable results right out of the box.
Canon RF 24-105L IS Image Quality
Any lens with a big zoom ratio has to make some compromises. The engineering required for 24mm is very different than the engineering requirements of 105mm. Canon has done a great job of offsetting those vulnerabilities, however, and has delivered a lens with very consistent performance across the zoom range. It has few flaws, but for the most part it delivers great looking results. The full details can be had in this video episode:
On the wide end, (24mm), it shows the typical flaws. Some noticeable barrel distortion along with a fair amount of vignette can be seen before correction. There is also a bit of lateral chromatic aberrations along the edges.
The standard profile clears up most of these things very well. Geometry isn’t perfect after correction, but close enough that you won’t notice any distortion unless you were doing what I was doing – shooting a brick wall! Vignette clears up nicely, and the lateral CA can be removed by just clicking the “remove chromatic aberrations” box. All of these things will also be fixed in camera if you shoot JPEGs.
Center sharpness and contrast is excellent, however, and the sharpness is fairly even. The corners aren’t quite as sharp and contrasty, but they aren’t far behind. This is definitely the strongest 24mm performance we’ve seen from any Canon 24-105 lens.
Shooting at conventional landscape apertures delivers great results.
The middle portion of the focal range is strong, too, with less distortion and vignette along with continuing even sharpness. Here’s some real world examples from the 35-75mm range.
At 105mm there is a tiny amount of pincushion distortion (no real issue) with a bit of vignette. Center sharpness remains good, with a little less corner sharpness (though still pretty good).
I think that the typical images one shoots at 105mm look great, and since longitudinal chromatic aberrations are well controlled, images have a much crisper look than the EF 24-105L II without the edge “bleeding” I sometimes saw with it. Look at how great this leaf looks – so crisp!
Stopping down a bit improves the corner performance to very good levels. Canon did a great job providing a consistent optical performance across the range.
Another strength is color rendition. I felt like landscape colors looked great, but I also liked skin tones and the amount of punch there was to images.
The lens also has fairly nice bokeh rendering, with out of focus areas looking soft and pleasing.
If there is any real lens vulnerability, it is that flare resistance could use some work. The RF 24-105L exhibits some fairly pronounced ghosting artifacts, particularly when the lens is stopped down. The lens does have Canon’s Super Spectra coatings, but they aren’t enough.
While I would never choose a lens with a maximum aperture of F4 as my top option for shooting astrophotography, the RF 24-105L does a satisfactory job in a pinch, with relatively low levels of coma.
The lens can focus down to 1.48′ (45cm) and produces a very useful 0.24x magnification. That’s good enough to get pretty close to things and produce a nice result, though with perhaps a bit of loss of contrast at close focus distances.
All in all, there’s a lot of good news here. Most important is that I do really like the look of the images the lens produces. They have that extra little “intangible”, which is great in a lens with such a big focal length. There are many more images to be seen in the Lens Image Gallery.
Conclusion
I don’t get overly excited about lenses with a maximum aperture of only F4, but there’s no question that this is a very useful lens. You can do about 80% of your photography (or maybe 100%, depending on your needs) without the Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM ever leaving your camera.
I would recommend a good telephoto lens and perhaps a wide aperture prime lens to compliment this lens. At the time of this review, the only camera that it can be used on is the Canon EOS R, but that will undoubtedly change as Canon introduces more cameras supporting the RF mount moving into the future. I noted in my EOS R review that the EOS R (at present) seems to be more a delivery system for the excellent new lenses that the RF mount has unlocked. The RF 24-105L is a great place to start in building your new lens kit, though, as it manages to avoid many of the common pitfalls from such lenses and delivers above-average image quality and truly excellent autofocus performance.
Pros:
Well built, highly functional lens
Nice aesthetic improvements and build feels more robust than EF 24-105L II
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Canon EOS R, RF 24-105, 24-105 R, EOS R, Canon, Mirrorless, EOS R Review, Canon EOS R Review, Canon R Review, RF, Canon RF, Canon RF 24-105 F4L IS, Dustin Abbott, Review, Hands-On, Sample Images, Video, AF, Resolution, Demonstration, How-To, RF 50mm 1.2L, RF 50L, 28-70 F2, Focus Speed
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Canon has FINALLY released a full frame mirrorless camera – the Canon EOS R. They have also launched a new lens mount – the RF. While many people advocated for Canon to retain the EF mount, early development for the platform shows that the RF mount may be the most exciting component thus far, with both better and also more unique lenses either launching or in development for the platform. After reviewing the Canon EOS R, I am convinced that the best thing about the camera thus far are the exciting new RF mount lenses. The camera shows great potential for focus, with incredibly fast focus speeds with the new RF 24-105mm f/4L IS. The new 24-105L kit lens is a clear improvement over previous 24-105mm lenses, and the combination of camera and lens produces beautiful images…as you can see here. I’ll share the video review pieces here as well so you can stay up to speed as to whether or not getting the new RF 24-105mm is worth the investment.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Canon EOS R, RF 24-105, 24-105 R, EOS R, Canon, Mirrorless, EOS R Review, Canon EOS R Review, Canon R Review, RF, Canon RF, Canon RF 24-105 F4L IS, Dustin Abbott, Review, Hands-On, Sample Images, Video, AF, Resolution, Demonstration, How-To, RF 50mm 1.2L, RF 50L, 28-70 F2, Focus Speed
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Canon released the first SL series camera (SL1/100D) about four years ago, and, while it didn’t make an immediate splash, it grew in popularity for those looking for the compactness of a mirrorless body (or near to it) in a DSLR. The SL2/200D/Kiss X9 (Canon confusingly has different names for its cameras in different markets) arrives with more features (including Canon’s excellent Vari-Angle LCD screen and DPAF focus system) and should continue to be an interesting alternative for those looking to utilize their Canon lens collection on a small, compact body that still handles like a familiar DSLR. I’m in the process of reviewing it now, and will be bringing you more coverage as we move ahead. Check back for new photos taken with the Canon EOS Rebel SL2 with the kit lens (EF-S 18-55mm f/4-5.6 IS STM) along with other lenses in a separate gallery.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
In photography there are moments when we have “fortunate accidents”; can we also have those with gear purchases?
I didn’t originally set out to purchase the Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM telephoto lens. It wasn’t readily available in the North American market and I initially decided that I would purchase the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM lens to use on both my 70D and the EOS M3 bodies (via the EF Adapter). The EF-S lens had a longer focal range, closer minimum focus distance, and a slightly faster aperture. The trade-off was significantly larger size, but the price was also a bit lower (in this case less is truly more!) My experience with EF 40mm f/2.8 STM and 50mm f/1.8 STM led me to believe that autofocus would be quite snappy through the adapter, as the STM lenses all seem to perform well on the M3.
Imagine my disappointment when I received the lens, put it on the adapter and then onto the M3, pressed the shutter down halfway, and then watched the less creep like paint drying into focus. It was shockingly slow, and I was seriously disappointed. The autofocus on the lens when mounted on my 70D was quite good, but something was not working with the M3. I bit the bullet and imported the EF-M 55-200 STM from Japan (it has since become available in North America!) I’ll come back to that in a moment. Let me finish the story on the EF-S lens for those of you considering it…
I put the word out about this on CanonRumors to see what other photographers were encountering. Another user let me know that there was a firmware update via Canon UK for the EOS M3 specifically for helping focus speed with the EF-S 55-250 STM. I downloaded it, but didn’t notice any measurable improvement. I shared this. He pointed out that there was a second firmware update for the lens itself specifically for the M3/lens combination. I downloaded and installed it, and voila, suddenly the lens focuses almost as quickly and confidently as the native EF-M 55-200 STM lens. It isn’t as fast as with the 70D (unsurprising), but the difference isn’t much. The lens focuses very fluidly for video as well. Other than the notable size difference, the operational difference between the two lenses is now minimal. We’ll come back and examine the pros and cons of both these lenses at the end of the review, but let’s get back to the actual lens at hand.
Nicely Compact
Prefer to watch your reviews? Just click below:
After actually getting and using the EF-M 55-200 STM lens, I’m not at all disappointed at how things ended up. The lens has quickly found a place into my heart for a number of reasons I’ll detail throughout the review.
The 55-200STM is a nicely compact lens for a lens that has an effective 88-320mm full frame equivalent focal length. Doubtless the choice to have a slightly slower aperture at all focal lengths when compared to the EF-S 55-250mm helped to enable this size. The EF-M 55-200 STM is basically 1/3rd stop slower at all focal lengths.
Lens
f/4
f/4.5
f/5
f/5.6
f/6.3
EF-M 55-200 STM
————-
55-62mm
63-99mm
101-163mm
164-200mm
EF-S 55-250 STM
55-63mm
64-99mm
100-154mm
155-250mm
————–
The EF-M is not a fast lens when it comes to aperture by any stretch of the imagination, but the trade-off is a fantastic size for a telephoto: 2.40 x 3.41″ (60.9 x 86.5 mm) and only 9.17 oz (260 g). It’s not a lot bigger than the size of the EF-M 18-55mm kit lens [2.40 x 2.40″ (60.9 x 61.0 mm)] and is only 50g heavier [7.41 oz (210 g)]. Both share a small but common 52mm filter size (a relief, as so far Canon’s EF-M lens filter sizes have been all over the small end of the map.) Like the 18-55mm, the 55-200 STM has a seven blade aperture iris. The blades on the 55-200 STM are rounded and do an effective job at producing fairly nice bokeh.
What the EF-M 55-200 STM doesn’t share with its little brother is a metal bayonet lens mount, substituting a plastic mount like the EF-S 55-250 STM instead. The lens is so light that this surely won’t ever provide any issue, but as a matter of principle I prefer the better build of a metal mount and had hoped that this would be status quo for the EF-M lenses from Canon. Perhaps the metal mount was sacrificed for weight savings, but it was probably more a cost saving move.
I have been very pleased with the overall look and build quality of the EF-M lenses. They seem like more premium lenses than the EF-S counterparts. I like the sleek barrel design and the fine texture of the zoom rings. They give you a metal instead of plastic feel, though this is just perception. The texture on the zoom ring feels like it has been machined into metal. I like it. This lens continues to the EF-M tradition of having no external switches, relying on the camera body to turn the IS on/off or to switch from AF to Manual Focus. Fortunately the M3 has a dedicated switch for this, making the transition less abrupt than before. The relatively small manual focus ring on the lens is a quick reminder that manual focus is really not much of a priority on STM lenses, and I still really dislike the disconnected feel of manually focusing STM lenses (which use an electronic “focus by wire” rather than a mechanical coupling to the lens elements for manual focus).
The inner barrel of the lens protrudes about 1 ¾”/5cm when at its 200mm end. The zoom design is a single barrel extension that feels secure and without any wobble. The zoom action is exceptionally smooth and very well damped. The smoothness feels more like an internal zoom action than an external one and is noticeably superior to EF-S lens which feels a little crude by comparison.
The 55-200 STM is noticeably smaller than the EF-S 55-250 STM lens. The EF-S lens is reasonably compact and light, but is an inch longer (4.38”/111.2mm), thicker around, and weighs a third more (375g). To use it on the M3, though, one must also add another inch in length for the EF Adapter along with another 110g of weight. The end result is 485g, which is uncomfortably close to twice as heavy and nearly 50% longer. The visual difference is even more striking than the numbers suggest. It ends up feeling fairly front heavy on the compact M bodies.
All in all I’m very thankful for the compact size and this has become instrumental to the way I actually use the lens. The combination is small enough that I have taken to bringing it along when I go out to shoot landscapes with a full frame wide angle kit (my current combo is the Canon 6D, Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 VC, and the Fotodiox WonderPana filter system.) The option of having a telephoto look at landscape scenes has already produced some new favorite images. It’s a small combination, but the great sensor of the M3 and the great optics of 55-200 STM are a winning combination. One of my favorite small bags for the M (and now M3) system has been the Vanguard 2GO 10. It’s nicely made and very compact, and I’m able to still fit this combination into it and have great protection for the combo. It is also discrete enough that I have started taking it along to non-critical events like school events and capturing the board room, for example:
The 55-200 STM is a fairly complex optical instrument for its diminutive size, with 17 elements in 11 groups. This is a bit more complex than the EF-S lens at 15 elements in 12 groups. It continues the trend of the EF-M lenses being optically superior to their EF-S counterparts, although the EF-S 55-250mm is already a fairly impressive lens for its very low price point. Still, the 55-200 STM manages to provide an optical advantage across most of the focal range, with perhaps a very slight advantage at 200mm for the EF-S lens (which is still not at the end of its own focal range). Still, you could not really ask for a better optical performance from this lens. It is essentially perfectly sharp from corner to corner save at 200mm, and even then it is near flawless. The image quality in fact is fairly close to the amazing Canon 70-300L, though the full frame lens enjoys other advantages. All in all this is really a very impressive little lens optically.
One area where it does give up an advantage to the EF-S lens is in the area of vignette. The extreme corners show a full 3 stops of shading compared to less than half that for the EF-S lens. The lens has to be stopped down to f/8 to really compete with the 55-250 STM wide open. If there is any advantage for the EF-M lens here it is that the vignette is extremely linear and is thus easy to correct for and in many cases actually quite flattering. Overall this must be considered one of the major optical shortcomings of the lens.
Another shortcoming is one shared with the EF-M 18-55 STM – a somewhat lackluster performance when it comes to flare resistance. While the lenses exhibit a fairly decent resistance to veiling when the sun is placed in the frame (particularly at wider focal lengths), there are a number of ghosting artifacts that show up at various focal lengths and apertures. The EF-M lens is better in the veiling department than the EF-S lens but worse in the ghosting artifact department. Canon has continued its unfortunate tradition from its EF-S mount lenses of not including a lens hood with the EF-M lenses. The 55-200 STM could probably use one in some circumstances. Contrast remains fine with the sun in the frame, but you just might end up with one of those green blobs floating across your image. I know from experience that those aren’t much fun to try to edit out in post. My advice is to keep the sun out of the frame for the most part (which is easier to do with a telephoto!)
The upside is that chromatic aberrations are exceptionally well controlled. I have searched though a number of images that I know from experience would be likely suspects but simply can’t find the CA. This is a very nice performance and contributes to the good overall image quality.
Contrast is very good, as is color rendition, resulting in crisp, detailed images from the lens that just look good…and sometimes great!
One final area that I’m a little disappointed in when comparing to the EF-S lens is that the minimum focus distance is higher for the EF-M lens (3.28’ vs. 2.79’) and the combination of that plus a shorter maximum focal length results in a considerably lower maximum magnification figure of .21x vs the .29x figure for the EF-S lens. This is still a useful figure, obviously, but the 55-250mm lens’ figure is even more useful. Here’s one near minimum focus from the 55-250 STM:
And now one from the 55-200 STM:
Handling in the Field
I doubt any of you will be surprised to hear me report that the EOS M line of cameras leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to sports action. Even the M3 (read my review here) though a delightful little camera in other areas is seriously underspecced when it comes to competing with, say, a Sony A6000 when it comes to burst rate and AF Servo tracking. Since there isn’t a great body to evaluate AF Servo tracking on, right now my assessment of the lens will limited by the limitations of the system it was designed for. If you are looking for top of the line option for sports, neither the M system nor this lens are your top choices. The lens performs fairly well within the constraints of the M3’s AF Servo and Continuous AF systems. I moved from one distance to another while firing off shots and got generally well focused results, and I’ve had no issues in normal mode using One Shot AF and capturing normal, reasonably still targets.
But trying to use the lens to capture fast moving action (like my dog playing fetch) is generally a disaster. The M3/EF-M 55-200 STM combo just doesn’t track. If I were using my EOS 70D for a sequence of the dog charging towards me I would have 7-10 frames, and, depending on the lens, they might just all be in focus. I was lucky to get the camera to even take a picture under the same circumstance, and even if it did do a bit of a burst (like in this brief four frame sequence), even the first picture wasn’t particularly well focused and it was clear that the camera did not refocus at all during the sequence. Focus stayed at the same point.
If you need a camera to track action you simply have to look elsewhere. The M system is not at all satisfactory for this type of shooting.
It can also be a bit of a frustration if you are trying to track, say, a bird flitting from branch to branch. The improved screen refresh rate of the M3 is an improvement over the M1 I used before, and the EV-F helps further, but the system is still a bit limited at telephoto distances when trying to track a moving target. Still, if you own a EOS M3 camera body, this lens is one of the better uses of its EV-F DC-1 electronic viewfinder. I find the EV-F helps to isolate you from distractions and enables you to more quickly latch onto a moving target visually.
I should also add that of all the EF-M lenses I have used, this is the most likely to miss focus and severely defocus before attaining the correct focus. It doesn’t happen often, but it typically just doesn’t happen at all with the other EF-M lenses. For the most part, however, the AF performance is fine for most of what I need the lens for.
I guess the point that must be made is that you need to have reasonable expectations for what you are going to get out of Canon’s mirrorless system and this, the lone telephoto lens. Mirrorless just isn’t a replacement for a good DSLR when it comes to action shooting, so if that is a priority for you, this isn’t your combo. If you are willing to accept those constraints and use the system to its strengths, you will be far more satisfied.
Strengths
I’m very happy to have this lens myself because of the focal range. I’ve already mentioned that this is a great option for landscape work. Often a telephoto focal length is just what the doctor ordered for many landscape scenes. It is either bring distant details close, compresses scenes in a flattering way, or enables you to isolate important details. I wrote an article about this that you can read here. I’ve often taken along my 70-300L telephoto lens for a telephoto perspective when shooting landscapes or traveling. There have been moments that I have regretted packing it along, however, mostly because it isn’t light and I didn’t end up using it very much. Since adding this lens to my kit I have elected to sell my 70-300L in lieu of the 100-400L II. The latter is the better wildlife telephoto option, and I have instead chosen to carry the M3/55-200 STM combo when traveling or shooting landscapes. I mostly need the focal length when traveling, not speed or action, and this combination produces some very, very good results that aren’t much behind what I could get from the 6D/70-300L under similar circumstances. So, when used to its strengths, it is a great option.
The 55-200 STM also has an effective image stabilization (IS) system. I have found that with careful technique I can get great results at 1/10th second and even reasonable results as low as 0.4 seconds at 200mm.
That becomes very useful when shooting static scenes (if there is any subject movement you HAVE to get your shutter speed up to stop action). When you do have a static scene, however, you can use a low shutter speed and help keep the ISO setting down. This helps a lot for various travel and general shooting situations. It is also a blessing when shooting video. The IS does a very credible job of providing a stable platform for video capture. The lens is rated at 3.5 stops of camera shake, which is a bit lower than the 4 stops that is often the standard in regular DSLR lenses, but I would say that the IS is actually very well implemented here. It is essentially silent in operation, doesn’t cause any jump of the “viewfinder” image (on the LCD or EVF), and does a great job of holding the image steady on the screen. It’s so good that you forget it is working, save you have a very steady screen and steady results.
Vs. the EF-S 55-250 STM
If you perform the firmware updates to the lens and EOS M3 body, the EF-S 55-250 STM remains a credible alternative to the EF-M 55-200 STM. It is larger than what feels natural for the system, of course, but I’ve used the combination for at least 100 shots and found it to not be a burden to use, either. The improved grip and ergonomics on the M3 body help in this regard. AF speed is just a fraction slower with the adapted lens, but is very usable after the firmware updates. The EF-S lens has a $50 advantage in price, but that advantage vanishes if you don’t already have the EF adapter. There is also the advantage of being able to use the lens on another APS-C body (in my case I also own a Canon EOS 70D). Here’s a brief breakdown of pros for each lens:
EF-M 55-200mm STM
Significant size advantage
Construction and handling are superior
Better overall image quality
Better balance on EOS M/M2/M3
Greater portability (retains the compact nature of the mirrorless system)
EF-S 55-250 STM
Price advantage (if you own the EF adapter)
Longer focal range
About 1/3rd stop aperture advantage at all focal lengths
Can be used on EF-S mount cameras as well.
Better minimum focus distance and maximum magnification
As you can see, there is no clear winner. For my own purposes I will probably just keep the actual EF-M lens. Its small nature makes it a logical companion for travel and it is the more natural fit for the M system – which is where I will primarily use it as I have better telephoto options when using my DSLRs. Still, my unique needs may not be yours, and if you are looking for a 1 lens telephoto solution to share across a couple of camera bodies, the EF-S lens may be the better choice for you.
Conclusions
All in all the EF-M’s lone telephoto option at the moment is at least a good one. It is very compact, has a great focal length, is nicely built (despite the plastic lens mount), and delivers excellent image quality. It is held back by the focus limitations of the M system when it comes to action photography, but it is a very fine option for general purpose shooting and landscape. It is even a decent portrait lens in a pinch. Its only real optical shortcomings are being prone to ghosting with the sun in the frame and a fairly heavy vignette, though I’ve not really noticed a big issue with the latter in the field and the former can be fairly easily avoided. It has a very effective image stabilizer, is cosmetically pleasing, and mechanically functional. It has a quickly found a niche in my own kit, and it can do the same for you, but only if you have realistic expectations about the limitations of the M system.
Pros:
Overall excellent optical performance across the focal range
Excellent contrast and color rendition
Compact and light
Nicely designed cosmetically
Mechanically very functional (great zoom action!)
Great chromatic aberration control
Effective image stabilization system (IS)
Cons:
Highlights limitations in the EOS M AF system
Has fairly heavy vignette on the wide end
Is prone to ghosting artifacts with the sun in the frame
Will occasionally hunt when acquiring focus
Has less focal range and smaller maximum magnification compared to EF-S equivalent
I reviewed a retail copy that I have personally purchased an added to my own kit. Here is a collection of more images that I’ve taken with the lens over the past few months:
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52014 in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The EOS M has long been the “red-headed stepchild” of Canon’s camera lineup. Canon wanted a piece of the growing mirrorless system market with their DSLR-like sensors and miniature bodies, but when the EOS M came to the market in June of 2012 it felt a step behind the competition in many ways. It was also priced a little too high to be competitive, and sales lagged. Interest (if not profits) got a temporary boost in the North American market in the middle of 2013 when the “firesale” began that saw the price drop by well more than half. I jumped in at that point, and found that despite some obvious shortcomings the camera was actually very, very useful. I’ve used it in multiple countries as a lighter option when I didn’t want to carry heavier kit, and I’ve added a bunch of images to my personal portfolio that I think are fantastic. The sensor on it was good – really good, in fact. It put other crop sensor bodies that I used to shame in the image quality department.
But development stalled. The system launched with only two available lenses (the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM and the EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM). The lenses were both lauded for excellent build quality and optical performance (particularly the 22mm “pancake”), but photographers wanted more options. But things got a little weird. Canon eventually did produce two more excellent lenses (a 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM wide angle lens along with later producing the 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM telephoto), but did not release either lens to the American market (arguably the largest in the world). They eventually released the EOS M2 in early 2014, but it was widely viewed as a very incremental update and again was not released to the American market. In the meantime stock of the existing EOS M gear was dwindling on shelves and in warehouses, and the system seemed to be dying a slow death.
But then earlier this year the EOS M3 was announced and then released to the Asian market, with some interesting marketing videos and a feature set that seemed to address a lot of the current criticisms. I found it interesting enough that a few months ago I took the plunge and imported one from Japan. My son Samuel took over the original M body, and is producing some amazing images with it. You can follow his Instagram account here: Samuel Abbott. Before getting into the meat of this review, let me just say that I’ve really enjoyed using the M3 and feel like its new 24.2 MP sensor is better than ever.
I got excited a few months ago when I got the announcement that Canon was taking another swing at the North American market on the strength of the M3 and announcing not only the camera but the lenses that had never been released. I’ve also been following mention of different EF-M lens patents with the hope all of this signifies that Canon finally has a real plan in place for advancing the EOS M system. It’s ironic how sure-footed Canon has been with its DSLR line and how comparatively awkward they have been in the mirrorless segment.
One exciting thing to note is that since the announcement to bring the EOS M3 to the North American market there has been an announcement from Rokinon of both a 50mm f/1.2 (I’m very excited about that!) and a 21mm f/1.4. The former provides (finally) a [very] fast portrait prime lens for the mount (about an 80mm equivalent) while the latter provides a fast(er) wide angle prime (approximately 35mm equivalent). Both of these will be manual focus only, but fortunately the M3 is far more forgiving of manual focus than, well, just about any other Canon body. I’m less excited about the 21mm simply because Canon’s 22mm f/2 STM is a fantastic lens already plus has autofocus. It is my most used lens with the system.
In a few weeks the EOS M3 will be available to purchase in the North American market (you can preorder here:): should you buy it?
Before we jump in, though, you might want to read:
Finally, if you prefer to watch your reviews, take a look here:
First, the Bad News
My time with the EOS M3 says that Canon has made some excellent advances but still has some room for improvement. In some cases it even seems like they have taken some steps backward from the EOS M Classic. I’ve been using the M3 quite extensively for the past three months, and certain “quirks” have made themselves manifest during ongoing usage of the camera. Here are the standouts:
1.Auto Exposure bracketing reverts to single shot speeds of about 1 frame per second, making it very difficult to do handheld HDR (and negatively impacting HDR from a tripod, too). There is an HDR mode on the camera, but that mode takes over all control of aperture, shutter speed, and also reverts to JPEG only. The exposure blending is done in camera (with all of the inherit limitations) and you are left with only the combined single JPEG image. This is far from what serious photographers are looking for. Using AEB (Auto Exposure Bracketing) does allow for the shutter to be hit only once and three bracketed shots will be taken (limited here to a maximum of +/-2 stops rather than +/-3 stops on my DSLRs), but again the shutter speed drastically drops to something like a fifth of its normal frame rate. The ironic thing is that the HDR mode shoots at the normal (faster) rate. This is clearly just a firmware issue (and one that the original M did not have), but my reaching out to Canon Japan produced this response, “Regarding shooting with AEB on the EOS M3, rather than the shutter being released three times during continuous shooting, three images are automatically shot with one release of the shutter.” This didn’t exactly address the question I asked! I’m hoping that a firmware update will eliminate this bug, but at the moment it is a serious shortcoming.
2. The second issue is also one that the original M did not have. When you are shooting with something like the 22mm f/2 STM lens there will be many times when you need to focus more precisely than what the fairly large box on the screen is centered on. For example, you may be wanting to focus on a subject’s eyes but the focus square on the LCD covers a large portion of their face. The original M allowed you to tighten up your focus by being able to “zoom” into the image 5x or 10x and then refocus. The M3 also allows you to zoom in, but when you partially hold down the shutter to focus, the zoom function temporarily reverts to the non-magnified view to focus. Once focus is locked the image returns to the previous state of zoom. This quirk prevents you from being able to achieve more “pinpoint” focus. Ironically you can manually focus while zoomed in, but you cannot autofocus. Considering that this was not a part of the original M’s functionality, this feels like another bug that needs fixing by a firmware update. On a positive note the overall autofocus is much more accurate than the original M.
3. On this same note, another quirk is that you cannot magnify the image at all when in video mode. This isn’t unusual during video capture, but the M3 doesn’t even allow for it before video capture commences. This is another step back from the M Classic and quite a frustration for those of us who like to use manual focus lenses for video. I have had to shift over into a stills shooting mode, dial in my focus, and then come back to video mode.
4.Body’s construction (not shape) feels like a step back from the M Classic. When I first got the M1 I was immediately impressed by how solid and dense it felt despite its small size. The M3 feels less professional grade and more commercial grade despite having a more robust shape and grip. One a positive note I must confess that my M3 has already easily survived a small fall from an open case to a linoleum floor. The battery door popped open but I can’t see any other effect from the fall. It made me wonder if the battery door popping open was by design to transfer some of the energy. The camera still feels well made, but it didn’t have the same impact on me that the original M did. But this is only perception: the M3 is actually made from magnesium alloy and coated to match Canon’s high end camera bodies. The slightly more “plasticky” feel is nothing more than perception.
5. Another oddity is that the choice to select AdobeRGB color space is missing from the menu; I can’t recall using a Canon camera without this option, including the original M. Furthermore, the menu design is a departure from the typical Canon design. I can’t say at this point whether it is better or worse; it is just slightly unfamiliar. The amount of custom functions is rather sparse, and I feel like several of the things that I have addressed above are items that I should have been able to address in the custom function portion of the menu.
6. One final quirk is that in some situations the M3 introduces a greenish cast that is both very “unCanon-like” and different from the original M. Here’s an example taken with the 22mm f/2 STM.
I’m not quite sure what causes this issue, but yet again it feels like a little quirk that a good firmware update could correct.
These items all contribute to the feeling of a somewhat unfinished camera. It unfortunately feels that the camera needed another few months of development before its release, and it is my sincere hope that the North American release of the M3 will signal some steps towards correcting some of these notable shortcomings. It feels like the development team didn’t start with all the good things about the EOS M and build upon them but rather started from scratch and overlooked some of the fundamentals. I’m afraid the end result will be a camera that for many potential buyers still seems to lag behind the competition.
At this stage it might seem that I’m down on the camera, but that’s not actually the case. I would suggest instead that it is the overall progress of the line in so many other areas that makes these particular issues stand out all the more (particularly those that seem like a regression in the M series). In many ways the M3 is great step forward for the M line. The ergonomics are significantly improved, the already excellent sensor performance is vastly improved, and the AF performance is more robust. The potential for greatness is there, but some of these issues seem unnecessary at this stage. In many ways I’ve thoroughly enjoyed the camera thus far, and here’s why.
Now for Some Good News
1. Improved ergonomics.
These photos show you a physical comparison of the original M and the M3 bodies.
The original M, while robustly made, had several ergonomic flaws. The first was an almost complete lack of a grip. There was a raised section the front of the camera that gave your fingers a little leverage, but it in no way felt like a mini-DSLR. The M3 adds a compact and yet fully formed grip that is nicely contoured and gives your hand a much more natural/complete purchase. This also allows for a more natural interaction with the shutter release button. It has one of the best physical designs of the small, mirrorless cameras. The M3 is a joy to carry and use as a result, and it is one of the few areas where it really shines in comparison to its mirrorless competition.
The M also lacked any kind of dial around the shutter release button (at least in a traditional sense). There was a bit of dial, but that was to choose between the three camera modes (Auto, M/AV/TV, or Video). As a result it was not unusual to inadvertently switch to the wrong mode. The M3 not only puts the shutter release button in a better/more natural position, but also gives you a fully functional dial that allows to change shutter speed in Manual mode or Aperture in AV mode. It also adds a fully functional dial for different camera modes (most of which had to be previously accessed through the menus) and also a second dial (THANK YOU!) for dialing in exposure value changes in up to 3 stops in either direction (+/-). It is fantastic to be able to quickly use that dial on the run to influence exposure in the way that you want.
The camera also adds two buttons to the back of the camera (exposure lock and zoom/focus point selection). These buttons can be programmed to other functions as well.
The original M had no built-in flash, but relied on the Speedlite 90EX that was sometimes sold in kit with the camera. If your kit did not come with that flash, you were out of luck. The M3 manages to fit in a very small built in flash, but it has a rather puny guide number of 5 (Meters coverage at ISO 100). The 90EX isn’t a ton better, but it has a guide number of 9. My flash head units of the choice (Metz 64 AF-1) have a guide number of 64, by comparison, but of course they are also bigger than the M3! Still, something is better than nothing here, and the M3 retains a fully functional hotshoe as well that is compatible with all portable flash units in the appropriate mount (including my Metz giants!). Just be aware if you are using a lens like the excellent Tamron 18-200 Di III VC that the lens will cause some shadow when used at wide angle with the on board flash despite it popping up fairly high. One nice aspect of the flash’s design is that you can use a finger to angle it upward to “bounce” the flash at capture, which can eliminate some of the shadows created by a larger lens and give a more pleasing end result.
I personally prefer to rely on the improved ISO performance on the sensor most of the time rather than attempting to use the flash, but I’m happy that it’s there.
2. Tilting LCD TouchScreen
One of the biggest ergonomic improvements to the already excellent touch screen on the EOS M is the inclusion of a tilting LCD. The LCD screen will tilt 180 degrees up and 45 degrees down. The only thing better would be in the inclusion of a fully articulating screen like the one on my EOS 70D. Have a tilting screen makes such a huge difference when you are shooting at unconventional angles (high or low) or when you are looking down and trying to stabilize the body on a platform of some kind (like when shooting video). I’ve already use it in so many different ways when either shooting events or just in the field. It is incredibly useful.
The primary problem with tilting as opposed to articulating is that it is really only useful when shooting in landscape/horizontal mode. If you are shooting vertically/portrait orientation the tilting screen doesn’t really do you much good. I’m rather partial to composing vertically myself, so I really miss that functionality. Still, the inclusion of the tilting LCD was on the primary selling features for me.
Canon does touchscreens really, really well, and the M3 is no exception. The combination of a great touchscreen and improved physical controls make this camera’s ergonomics very, very nice.
3. Improved AF performance (with caveats)
The original M was famous (infamous?) for its slow autofocus performance upon its introduction. Canon was later able to unlock MUCH better AF performance with a firmware update down the road. The M3 employs Canon’s Hybrid CMOS AF III system which uses a combination of contrast-based and phase-detect technologies and embeds 49 points across most of the sensor’s area (about 80% vertical and 70% horizontal coverage). Canon claims that it focuses up to 6.1x faster than the original M, and perhaps that is true of before the firmware update to the original M, but frankly the camera only feels marginally faster to me at best. The improvement is most obvious in single shot AF mode. It is also only a little better at AF Servo tracking but still doesn’t continually focus when shooting burst mode.
Canon is touting the increased speed, but I find the bigger upgrade to be in the focus accuracy department. It may only be slightly faster acquiring focus, but it definitely focuses with more accuracy and consistency. I’ve found my focus accuracy thus far to be generally excellent with the M3 and the 22mm f/2 STM, 18-55mm IS STM, and 55-200mm IS STM. I also use a Rokinon 12mm f/2 wide angle lens (which I love!), but it is manual focus and not really relevant to the current discussion.
The only time I encounter hunting is when using either an adapted lens (via the EF adapter) or occasionally with the 55-200 STM telephoto, which sometimes hunts back and forth for a split second.
Performance with adapted lenses via the Canon EF adapter is not really any better in my experience (in fact, it is worse). You will definitely want to turn off Continuous AF if using non-STM lenses, as the noise and continually hunting will drive you crazy! The single best lens that I’ve used to adapt to the M is the 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake lens, which seems almost like a natural part of the system in both size and operation. The new 50mm f/1.8 STM is another good fit. I was very disappointed when I tried the EF-S 55-250 IS STM lens. I thought that I could use it on both systems (Canon 70D + M3), but the AF performance was so painfully glacial that I decided against it and bought the EF-M 55-200. During this review I tried it on the original M via adapter (my son now owns my original EOS M) and discovered the AF performance was much better. In fact, I probably would have been satisfied with the combination if I were still using the original M.
But then something interesting happened. I put the word out about this on CanonRumors to see what other photographers were encountering. Another user let me know that there was a firmware update via Canon UK for the EOS M3 specifically for helping focus speed with the EF-S 55-250 STM. I downloaded it, but didn’t notice any measurable improvement. I shared this. He pointed out that there was a second firmware update for the lens itself specifically for the M3/lens combination. I downloaded and installed it, and voila, suddenly the lens focuses almost as quickly and confidently as the native EF-M 55-200 STM lens. It isn’t as fast as with the 70D (unsurprising), but the difference isn’t much. The lens focuses very fluidly for video as well. Other than the notable size difference, the operational difference between the two lenses is now minimal.
I will be comparing the two lenses head to head for a while before deciding which to keep and which to sell. They both have their strengths. I only wish I had discovered this before I went ahead and purchased the second lens, so perhaps my experience can help others.
That aside, however, the fact that such an incredible difference could be made through firmware was startling. On top of this the fact that it took a two step process even with an STM lens (the focus motor that works best with EOS M3), suggests to me that either Canon has either outpaced itself with the AF system on this body or deviated from the norm. There is clearly a very different process at work with the AF system when compared with the former M body, and I suspect that such tweaks could probably help a number of other lenses…but will they get them?
Using other lenses in my kit (most of which are not STM) also worked better on the original M via the adapter. This makes me curious – is this a matter of the existing EF adapter being better tuned to the focus system of the original M, or is this something unique to my camera body/adapter combination. This patent makes me think that it more likely the nature of the adapter and that Canon probably needs to release an adapter more attuned to the focus system of the M3.
My own experience makes me conclude that Canon has perhaps oversold the AF performance improvement. It is better, yes, but I personally feel that it is incremental progress when radically better AF performance was needed to match what the leaders in the field are offering. The majority of current mirrorless cameras all focus more quickly than the EOS M3 and add a faster frame rate to boot.
The Manual Focus front is surprisingly better. Finally Canon has made some concessions towards the fact that some lenses are manual focus only and that some situations need manual focus. The EOS M3 allows you the option of enabling focus peaking (with a choice of three colors) when manually focusing (this can be programmed to one of the back buttons). The optional Canon EV-F DC-1 also helps (more on that in a moment), as does the ability to magnify any point on the LCD screen 5x or 10x. The latter feature was available before, but the implementation is more natural/usable on the M3. The EV-F makes a huge difference when manually focusing, as it shows the true depth of field and allows you to more easily achieve visual focus. The addition of focus peaking (I’ve assigned it to the video record button in stills shooting for easy on/off toggle) combined with the EV-F (and the potential to magnify the image in the EV-F) makes pinpoint focus pretty easy and opens up a lot of possibilities. I’m enjoying shooting some of my vintage glass on the EOS M3 (far more than the original M), and an old lens like the Super Takumar 150mm f/4 makes for a surprisingly good portrait lens (now if only Canon had in body stabilization!!)
One final nice addition when it comes to manual focus is the inclusion of a dedicated MF button (press the rear dial to the left). The EF-M STM lenses don’t have any switches on them, and this allows you to quickly turn on manual focus if desired. STM lenses are still far from my favorite lenses to manually focus because of the almost total lack of tactile feedback, but this does work better than using manual override. I often wondered if I was doing anything in the AF+MF mode on the EOS M cameras with STM lenses.
Frankly I am more impressed with the upgrades to the MF functionality to the EOS M3 than I am to the AF functionality. Both improvements are appreciated, but one feels more substantial than the other. Then again, Canon was able to vastly improve the first M’s AF through firmware update; maybe lightning can strike twice here.
4. Improved Connectivity
The M3 jumps into the modern era by the inclusion of both Wi-Fi and NFC (Near-Field Communication). I’ve previously written about the pros/cons of Canon’s Wi-Fi system on the Canon 6D (the implementation is similar here). One area that I find useful is that this is one of the most convenient ways to shoot long exposures with the M3 (access BULB mode by putting the camera into Manual mode then turning the dial past the longest native exposure time of 30 seconds.) Using the remote app you can simply hold the button down on your phone while the timer ticks off on your screen. There is no place on the M series to attach a remote shutter release, although you can also use one of the RC wireless remotes to achieve the same effect. Yes, you can hold down the actual shutter release button on the camera, but this is not recommended as you will invariably introduce camera shake.
I have an iPhone, so I can’t make use of the NFC technology that makes for a much easier “handshake” between the two devices (just tap the two NFC devices together to pair them). The Wi-Fi connectivity has not really progressed since the 6D was released, unfortunately. Canon has a long way to go in this area. Once you do get things connected, however, it is certainly useful. I use Wi-Fi connectivity to get images to an iPad, for example, and from there I can share them more simply with either clients or social media. I’ve also used the Wi-Fi connectivity for remote shooting on many occasions.
5. Improved Image Quality
The strength of the M system has always been in its sensor. I have been impressed time and again at the fantastic images a tiny camera like this can make. The M3 kicks it up even further, and moves from the 18mp in the original M to a new 24.2 sensor along with the newest DIGIC 6 processor. The image quality from the M3 rocks, frankly. It’s when you review your images that your appreciation for this camera jumps up. It definitely outperforms the sensor on my 70D. For the first time (ever) I don’t see a huge drop-off in quality when I compare images from my full frame bodies to this crop sensor (APS-C) body. Yes, full frame is still better, but the differences are more subtle now.
Less noise, better high ISO performance, and more detail/resolution are all apparent when using this body. I notice that I have more latitude when I go to process and have to push things a little bit. The amazingly clean images from my 6D bodies have always been a joy to process for this reason, and while the M3 cannot yet rival them, it’s getting closer. This is one area where Canon can most definitely compete, and if you prefer JPEG shooting, the M3 produces some really stunning JPEG output. It has always felt very empowering to have such strong imaging potential in such a small package, and the M3 only increases that feeling. I can put together a 3 or 4 lens kit in a tiny bag that I won’t even notice the weight of and yet produce professional grade images. My own personal EF-M kit covers from 12mm to 200mm and weighs next to nothing.
I directly compared the M Classic and M3 in higher ISO performance. Both sensors produce more grain/noise than what my full frame bodies do, but when the ISO starts to jack up (starting at ISO 1600) there is a noticeable difference in the overall look of the images. The M Classic images quickly develop the typical high ISO look, losing contrast and having some color banding in the shadows.
I didn’t see the color banding on the M3 at any setting save its extended range of 25,600 – even the native maximum setting of 12,800 avoided color banding and retained a nice dynamic range with good highlights and dark shadows – the images overall look good and contrasty, just noisy. The coarseness of the grain is noticeably heavier than that of the 6D at equivalent apertures, though the M3 actually has an arguably richer looking result when viewed as a whole. I would categorize its results as actually very good here.
I walked extensively with the M3 in New York City in August, and got a number of awesome images while scarcely noticing the weight of the camera. It was quite a difference from the days on the trip that I carried a full frame DSLR with a lens or two!
It is the image quality that tips the balance in favor of the M3 for me. I do get frustrated by some of its shortcomings because it really feels like most of them could have/should have been easily addressed. The camera at times feels like a BETA release. I’m never going to use it for action photography, and I don’t have to rely on it for my sole camera system, so I’m more easily able to overlook some of the shortcomings and just let the camera play to its strengths. I encourage you to check out the Image Gallery to see the camera in action with a variety of lenses.
6. Improved Battery Life
Battery life is not a natural strength for mirrorless bodies. Their small nature often means comparatively small battery packs, and the original EOS M seemed to be always burning through its battery. The larger LP-E6 battery pack that most of my DSLRs take often lasts for 1100-1200 shots. If you start the day with a freshly charged battery pack you simply aren’t going to have to worry about battery life. The EOS M was a different story. Its battery was rated at 230 shots, and you were lucky to get that. You simply had to plan on getting multiple battery packs or staying close to your charger.
On paper the M3 doesn’t have a big advantage. It’s LP-E17 battery pack is only “rated” for 250 shots, but real life shooting for me (and everyone else that I’ve dialogued with) show real life battery performance is MUCH better. It’s not unusual to not just get double that, but triple that. One primary difference is that the means that the rating is produced involves using the flash at least 50% of the time. The M Classic did not have a built in flash, so its rating did not include that impact on the battery life. I personally almost never use the M3’s flash and have set it to go to “sleep” faster (meaning the LCD screen turns off more quickly). As I result I will often get 700-800 shots from a single charge, making the battery life in my style of shooting not far off of my DSLRs. I’ve never had the battery go dead in a day of use on me, so it means that even when traveling all I need to do is remember to charge the battery every day or two and I’m golden. There was no “magic bullet” with the M Classic – battery life was poor no matter what, so this is actually a significant area of improvement on the M3. Some have reported getting nearly 1000 shots out of a charge in ideal circumstances.
There are a number of factors that can impact battery life, but my experience says that real life battery performance is actually very strong for a mirrorless camera.
7. Somewhat Improved Burst/Buffer
The overall speed isn’t really higher with the M3. It is rated for 4.2 FPS, which is about par with the M Classic. The file sizes are of course 25% larger, which accounts for part of the reason why the burst rate isn’t further improved. Nor is the buffer with those big RAW files improved. What has improved, however, is the burst rate with JPEG files. Before the buffer would fill after 17 JPEGs, but now you can essentially shoot until the battery is dead, though it’s hard to imagine a scenario where you would actually be testing this limit.
In short this is a marginal improvement, at best, and the competition has gotten much, much better during this same period. Canon has definitely fallen behind here.
8. Screen Refresh and overall Speed
One irritating aspect of the original M was how it would take for the camera to be ready to shoot again after capture. The screen would go blank for a few seconds before it would refresh and be ready to compose again. The M3 has completely eliminated that, and the camera is ready again to shoot nearly instantly after capture. The camera feels more responsive overall.
Video Features
Another area where Canon is falling behind here is in the video capture. There are some pluses. The built in stereo microphones are notably improved, and the overall tracking is superior and smoother when compared to the M. I used it at a recent family events to record speeches around the table. I was just handholding it with the 22mm f/2 lens attached (the must have lens for the camera!) and it did a great job of the simple tracking needed along with very acceptable audio recording. If you just need a quick camcorder replacement, it is is just fine.
Video quality is quite good, and I periodically use the camera to shoot footage for my YouTube channel. It does have a jack for an external microphone and standard mini-HDMI output, but it doesn’t have a headphone jack or clean HDMI out.
But the camera is lacking when it comes to video modes. Forget 4K – that’s not even on the radar. In fact, the slow motion spec is a somewhat apathetic 720P/60 FPS. Basically all of the competitors are offering a 60FPS/1080P standard, so the M3 is really lagging in this regard.
None of this is to say that the M3s video is bad (it isn’t), but it is to say that this is one more area where Canon is lagging behind its mirrorless competitors. People expect more in 2015.
Accessories
The big new player for the M3 is the Canon EV-F DC-1 EV-F viewfinder. It’s actually a very clever and useful device, sensing when your eye comes near and automatically switching between the EV-F and the LCD screen. It can be tilted up to give you more flexibility in how you use it. The screen resolution is pretty decent, although it does lag a bit when you are rapidly moving the camera. But many people are going to mostly notice two things:
It isn’t built into the camera, but instead mounts on the hotshoe. It adds a fair bit of size (height) to the camera, and as a result the M3 may not fit in your typical bag of choice with the EV-F mounted.
It is a separate expense. You can purchase it in a kit with the M3 like I did, but if you buy it separately, it is a whopping $229. You can live without it, obviously, but many of the M3’s rivals come with a built in EV-F.
Once the elephant in the room has been cleared, here are my thoughts on the EV-F. I like having it, obviously, but there are pros and cons to it being a separate item. It’s nice that the M3 can stay more compact by not having it built in, and perhaps nice that you don’t have to pay for it if you aren’t going to use it. There are also some serious downsides, though. First of all, there have already been a number of times that I’ve thought of the EV-F while in the field and remembered it was sitting in my photography cabinet at home. It doesn’t do you any good if you don’t have it with you. You can obviously forget using a flash unit and the EV-F simultaneously, too, as the DC-1 mounts on the camera’s hotshoe. Other manufacturers have figured out a way to incorporate the EV-F without blowing up the size too much, so surely Canon can do the same. One plus is that is the DC-1 will work with several other bodies (some of the Powershot G series cameras), so you may get additional value there.
Do you need the EV-F? It depends on your shooting style and what lenses you are using. The LCD on the M3 is very good. It rarely gets washed out in bright sun, and for general purpose shooting it works very well, particularly because you can tilt it into a useful position. But I discovered when doing the Tamron 18-200 VC review on the EOS M Classic that I didn’t particularly enjoy the experience of shooting telephoto focal lengths with the LCD. The slight refresh lag and inability to completely isolate what’s on the screen with your eye made trying to track anything an exercise in frustration. The EV-F certainly helps with this, and I really like it mounted when I have the 55-200 STM mounted.
It is also very beneficial when shooting manual focus. The EV-F shows true depth of field (like the EG-S focus screen I have in one of my EOS 6D bodies), and the ability to zoom in the EV-F (5x or 10x) plus the addition of Focus Peaking makes getting accurate focus with manual focus lenses quite easy.
If you are mostly going to just use the 11-22mm, 18-55mm, or the 22mm lenses, you may not really need the EV-F at all.
Another important accessory for the system is the EF Adapter. This has been one of the Canon’s main talking points for selling the M system along with their chief excuse for not developing more lenses for it. Virtually any lens that will autofocus on an EF camera will autofocus (at varying speeds) on the EOS M system via the adapter. This includes all the EF-S lenses. This is a big deal for those of us already invested in the Canon ecosystem, as it means that we already have lenses to use on the EOS M/M2/M3 bodies. Not all lenses translate as well to the smaller mount, however, and some lenses are fairly unusable due to slow autofocus or unwieldy size. If you want to use the continual AF Servo focus (particularly in video mode), you will be best served by the STM lenses. They focus more smoothly and much more quietly. A number of other lenses work fairly well in One Shot mode, however, and it is very nice to be able to get a fresh look at some of your lenses. I particularly like the EF-S 24mm f/2.8, EF 40mm f/2.8 STM, and 50mm f/1.8 STM lenses on the M system (along with the aforementioned 55-250 STM after the updates). A couple of other nice options are the EF 35mm f/2 IS and EF 85mm f/1.8 lenses. The new Tamron 35mm f/1.8 and 45mm f/1.8 VC lenses work quite nicely, too.
I mentioned earlier in the review that the EF adapter needs some revisiting, however. The process of focus has clearly changed from M Classic to the M3, and the adapter that worked quite well on the M works less well on the M3 despite its more robust AF. A new EF adapter made for the newer M3 would really help breathe life into the process of adapting EF lenses to the system.
One closing note is that the vastly improved grip on the M3 makes using slightly larger/heavier lenses a more natural experience than the M Classic.
Lenses
Another area where Canon has really failed to support the M series in is in EF-M lenses. There are a few good third party lenses in an EF-M mount from Samyang/Rokinon and Tamron, but most people are not looking for manual focus lenses (which accounts for almost all of them save the Tamron 18-200 VC). To date Canon has had but four lenses, though a fifth lens has just been announced alongside the new EOS M10 budget mirrorless (smaller, lighter, and a bit cheaper than the M3. It has the older 18MP sensor rather than the M3’s 24 MP). That lens is the EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM. I doubt too many are going to jump up and down over this focal length (although it does correspond to the classic 24-70mm focal length – very useful!) and aperture speed (slow!), but it looks to have a few nice tricks up its tiny sleeves. It is a collapsible zoom, storing at a tiny 1.75″/45.5mm. The 15mm wide end is very nice, equating to 24mm on a 35mm/full frame body – a very useful focal length for landscape work. The EF-M 18-55mm is 2.4″/61mm long and weighs 210g compared to the paltry 130g for the 15-45mm, so the new lens certainly wins for being small and light. I’ve not tested it optically, but thus far all of the EF-M lenses have actually been very good optically. Other lenses include:
EF-M 22mm f/2 STM (so far the only real “must have” for the system. Super small, very light, and optically excellent.)
EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM (Universally acclaimed as a fantastic wide angle lens that punches way above its weight).
EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM (Kit lens that is a little better than the EF-S counterpart, but not exceptional).
EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM (once again this is optically superior to the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM, but at the cost of a slower aperture and smaller zoom range).
You’ll note one glaring problem in this line-up of now five (when the 15-45mm arrives) native lenses – there is a LOT of overlap. The 55-200 STM is only lens to not really share its focal length with another lens in the kit. Furthermore, they are almost all (with the exception of the lone prime) very slow lenses, with the final two hitting a maximum aperture of f/6.3 on the long end. As a result, the 22mm pancake lens remains the lone native option for use in low light shooting. This is one more area where Canon really, really needs to show support for the system. There is no real portrait lens available for the system, nor is there a macro option. These, to me, need to be Canon’s priority in lens development. An equivalent to the excellent EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro could do a reasonable job of addressing both those concerns. I intend to review the new Rokinon 50mm f/1.2 shortly, and I’m personally excited about it, but once again it is a manual focus only lens and simply won’t have broad appeal for most users.
Canon needs to step up its game when it comes to lens development for the EOS M lineup to prove its commitment to mirrorless.
In Conclusion
The Canon EOS M3 remains a bit of a paradox. In many ways it is a far superior camera to where Canon began with the M series, and in many aspects it addresses the concerns that I and other photographers had with the M Classic. But then there are areas where it takes some puzzling steps back. In some ways it feels like a more unfinished camera then the original M despite brilliant strides forwards in some areas. There have always been two distinct advantages for the M series when compared to many other mirrorless cameras: 1) Fabulous image quality and 2) the ability to use more than 70 EF lenses via adapter. Canon has advanced the former advantage (though others have made big strides as well!) but seems to have watered down the latter, at least with the current adapter. Much like the first M, however, the M3 ends up being more than the sum of its parts. It has a really excellent build, ergonomics, and logical design. I really, really like the camera despite its flaws, and just today I went trail running with the M3 and four(!) lenses without hardly noticing the weight at all. Being able to carry such a small camera without feeling like you are compromising your ability to get stunning images remains a very heady experience. (M)3 may not quite be a charm, but keep at it, Canon, you’re getting there!
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52014 in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Confession time: I had pretty much written off the new Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM SPORT lens before I reviewed it. I saw the specs (including the heavy weight and increased size over the Tamron 150-600 VC), and the MTF charts and early shots didn’t seem to be a lot better than the Tamron. I struggled to see the market for a more expensive, much heavier version of the already very popular Tamron lens. While some of those initial reservations are undoubtedly true, I must confess that the new Sigma won me over during the review period. Yes, it is definitely very heavy (more on that in a moment), and yes, it’s price is nearly double that of the Tamron, but the Sigma is undoubtedly a premium lens that, if anything, is probably a bargain at its roughly $2000 price tag. This is a pro lens with a pro build and premium optics. Yes, it is a variable aperture lens, but it is a variable aperture lens in the way that the Canon 70-300L and the new 100-400L II are variable aperture lenses. One should not mistake them for being optically inferior. For a primer, you can read my review of the Canon 100-400L II here or my review of the Tamron SP 150-600mm VC here.
In this review I will be highlighting what I perceive as the strengths and weaknesses of this lens and will also be sharing a host of images that should help tell the story.
Build Quality
I shared my initial thoughts in the unboxing video where you can also see how the lens arrives and what comes with it.
In this second video I take a very close look at the build quality of the lens in an interactive fashion.
The Sigma is a beautifully made lens. I think that Sigma’s new design philosophy is producing the best looking (and feeling) lenses of any of the modern lens makers. While they are all essentially a black on black design, Sigma has done an exceptional job mixing textures and materials to produce lenses that look very sleek and modern while also feeling tough and durable. There is great attention to detail that must be experienced to be fully realized. The materials all feel very premium under your fingers. At key points there are soft touch, rubberized sections that just feel great. Even the lens hoods feel like they’ve been given a lot of thought. The Tamron 150-600 VC is an extremely good lens, optically amazing for its value price point, but the Sigma Sport lens is in a completely different category when it comes to build quality. It is a premium/pro lens, and it gives up nothing in its build to Canon’s high end telephoto lens.
The Sigma has the “extra mile” when it comes to its weather sealing. It has the rubber gasket around the lens mount, of course, but it also has fluorine coatings on both the front and rear elements to resist water and oil and nice sealing around the switches. They call it “dust and splash-proof construction” and especially mention resistance to ocean spray. Here’s a promotional video from Sigma about the weather proofing on the lens. Click here to view.
They’ve also gone the extra mile in providing a seriously nice (and seriously huge!) padded case (which came in handy for traveling with the lens) and a padded lens “cap” that works well but will also be a bit of a pain to bring along or remember.
The lens optical construction is fairly complex, with 24 elements in 16 groups, including two FLD (low dispersion elements) similar to fluorite and 3 SLD (special low dispersion) elements for greater contrast and clarity. The aperture iris is a nine rounded-blade design for nicely shaped bokeh highlights even when the lens is stopped down. It does accept standard threaded filters, but at a massive 105mm size. Please note that the more inexpensive Sigma “Contemporary” 150-600mm does not share this optical formula but has 20 elements in 14 groups along with fewer of the exotic (and expensive) FLD and SLD elements. I haven’t yet reviewed that lens, but I suspect it is designed to compete more directly with the Tamron.
Sigma is also promoting that this new lens is compatible with their new Global Vision line of teleconverters. AF performance (or viability) is going to come down to your camera body, but it is encouraging to know that the lens is designed with teleconverters in mind. I did not have one of these teleconverters on hand, but if you check out Bryan Carnathan’s chart testing here you will see that the results with a 1.4x teleconverter are certain viable. Adding a 2x tele doesn’t strike me as a great idea as your maximum aperture on the long end becomes f/13 and image quality is seriously degraded! Using the Kenko DGX Teleplus Pro 1.4x extender on a Canon 6D was not a productive experience. There was a lot of hunting, and a unique (and uniquely frustrating) straying from focus even once lock was achieved. Image quality is very usable, but AF makes it a bit of a frustrating experience. My recommendation is that you plan primarily around using this lens in its bare form or with a camera that supports AF at f/8.
One final serious plus for the new Sigma line (and this lens) is that it is eligible for Sigma’s proprietary Mount Conversion Service. Put simply, it means that if you switch camera systems you can have your lens mount replaced by Sigma with that of your new system (Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Pentax, and Sony). The cost for a lens like this would be $250, which isn’t cheap, but is probably cheaper and a lot less work than trying to sell the lens and replace it with the new mount. It’s a nice option, and that, combined with Sigma’s USB dock, helps to avoid future compatibility issues. It’s a smart move by Sigma, and reflects their increasingly “big picture” look at their place in the photography world.
The lens has a zoom lock that fortunately can be employed at any focal length, though it seems that it will only deploy at the marked focal lengths on the barrel. It can be a bit of a pain sometime to get the lens lined up properly at one of those focal lengths in the field so that the lock can be deployed. Plan on using the zoom lock, however, as zoom creep is almost instantaneous when the lens is facing down due to that very heavy front element. I personally prefer the design of the new Canon 100-400L II lens with its zoom lock ring, but the Sigma is an improvement over the Tamron design which only allows locking at the 150mm and 400mm settings. Sigma’s design also allows the lens lock to be released if there is a sharp turn on the zoom ring or an impact to the front of the lens to prevent damage to the lock.
The lens is purposefully designed to operate as either a traditional twist zoom or as a push/pull design. Just grab the soft-touch material near the lens hood and pull it out, or as I have frequently done, just allow gravity to the pull the lens into the zoomed position before bringing it up to shoot.
The lens hood is a bit different in design than your standard hood. For one thing, it is made of aluminum rather than plastic. This gives it a more premium feel. It is not a traditional bayonet lock to mount it but instead relies on a tension knob to lock the hood into place. The hood is beautifully sculpted, and another nice feature is a rubberized surface towards the front that helps absorb shock. I really like this feature for a couple of reasons. First, I will stand the lens upright sometimes if I am temporarily mounting another lens on the camera body. The rubberized surface prevents damage to either the lens or the surface you are resting the heavy lens on. Secondly, there were times when I have (slowly) put the lens against glass when shooting through it to minimize reflections. Rubber on glass is much safer than metal on glass!
The lens has four switches on the side. The first is a switch for autofocus. There are three choices: Manual, Auto, and MO. MO mode allows for full time Manual Override, and should be your default choice. Second is a focus limiter. It too has three settings: Full, 10M to ∞, and 2.6-10M. Learning to utilize these in the appropriate situations will vastly help AF speed. The third switch is for the OS (Optical Stabilizer). Three choices again: 1 (standard), 2 (for panning), and off. I’ll comment more on the stabilizer in a moment. Finally there is a Custom mode switch. This switch relies on the Sigma USB dock and allows you to program two custom modes into the lens and to switch between those. Options include AF optimizations, optical stabilizer patterns, focus distance tweaks, and a variety of other options. This ability to customize the lens certainly sets it apart as a more premium choice than the Tamron. The USB dock is an additional expense ($60 at B&H), but works with a variety of lenses that are a part of Sigma’s global vision.
The price for all of this goodness comes at a pretty serious weight premium. The weight of this new Sigma is a bit of a bear; it is here that you must pay the price for the more professional grade construction. It weighs a whopping 2860g, or a full third more than the Tamron (1950g). Unlike the Tamron, however, the tripod collar on the Sigma cannot be removed. With the tripod collar removed the Tamron loses several hundred more grams and becomes even more easily hand-holdable. The Sigma’s collar does not remove at all, but one plus is that is designed with “stops” at each 90 degree position that makes it easy to rotate between landscape and portrait modes and to stop at the right point. The tripod collar foot is more robust than that of the Tamron and has three separate positions for locking into a tripod. I used the center position for use with my harness and the lens balanced quite well in that position.
One of the greatest challenges with the Sigma’s weight, however, is when using the lens towards the long end of its focal length. The lens extends out quite a bit at maximum zoom (and it is already 29cm – nearly a foot – long before zooming out another five inches or so), and the lens inner barrel construction is metal rather than plastic, as is the lens hood itself. That combined with a very large (105mm) and heavy front element means that you have to support a significant amount of weight quite far away from your body. This makes handholding the lens for any length of time fairly challenging, as it is difficult to find a good technique to support that amount of weight. I did find that as I used the lens over multiple weeks that I began to build strength and found it less cumbersome to shoot with. The plus is that my 70-200 f/2.8 lens now feels like a toy by comparison; it has never felt so light!
The Tamron, by comparison, is reasonably easy to handhold for many photographers. I shot the Sigma almost exclusively handheld during my review period, but it was the most challenging lens that I’ve personally used to shoot handheld. You will build the muscle if you are strong enough, but many, many photographers will find the weight very difficult to manage. Everyone who handled the lens during my review time was shocked at how much it weighed. At the end of the day I think this is going to be the most significant challenge with the lens for most photographers. If you are primarily a tripod or monopod shooter, then this isn’t a problem. If you do primarily shoot handheld, however, you had better be pretty strong!
I spent about 5 ½ hours walking with the lens in a Cotton Carrier chest harness system at the Toronto Zoo. It is a massive complex that covers nearly 3 square kilometers, and my iPhone told me that I walked about 11 kilometers for the day. The vast majority of that was with this lens in the harness. I’m very fit and accustomed to backpacking with heavy gear, so I did fairly well, but I definitely felt the weight. I took hundreds of photos with the lens throughout the day, and I was certainly thankful in a few situations when I could rest my elbow on a pillar or something similar to take a bit of the weight while shooting. Think of it as carrying a baby around in a front facing baby carrier. I highly recommend the Cotton Carrier or something similar if you are going to carry the lens for extended periods of time. Distributing that weight across your back and hips really helps!
I should note that the Sigma got a LOT of attention that day at the zoo. I had a number of complete strangers come up to me and start conversations about it. It was primarily the lens’ large size that got their attention, but when they saw some of the pictures it was producing on the screen of my camera, they were even more impressed. I overheard dozens of other comments between others about the lens. It was a bit like hanging out with a celebrity for the day!
All in all this lens gives you the impression that it is a serious, professional grade lens. There are a number of great touches both in the build quality and the design of the lens that show that Sigma designed this lens for professionals or discerning amateurs. The weight of the lens suggests that they also designed this lens for the very strong!
Autofocus Observations
My primary fear when approaching a Sigma lens comes down to the autofocus. Both anecdotal evidence from other photographers as well as my own observations suggest that this tends to be Sigma’s Achilles’ heel. I am delighted to report that this lens exceeded my expectations when it comes to AF accuracy and consistency. I shot more than 600 shots during the review period and don’t recall any shot being spoiled by poor focus accuracy. I did AFMA the lens, but didn’t feel like the minor adjustment made a difference in the field and so just reset the values to zero. I did not calibrate the lens with the Sigma dock but was very happy with the consistency and quality of the focus from the lens. I would presume that optimizing the lens through the dock would produce marginally better results.
The Hypersonic Motor (HSM) is incredibly quiet. The lens focuses like a ghost, with little to no sound to indicate its activity. It also focuses smoothly, without jerking both at startup or when settling on final lock. I directly compared its speed to that of the Tamron and found that while I preferred the focus method of the Sigma the final results were pretty equal in terms of speed and accuracy. This isn’t a bad thing, as the Tamron focuses quite well and came out looking pretty good when I directly compared it with the new Canon 100-400L II.
The overall accuracy of the focus in the various situations that I used it (from wildlife to event work) were part of what won me over during the review period. My worst fears regarding this lens were not realized. Kudos to Sigma for making real progress in this area. If I were to own the lens myself I would certainly purchase the USB dock and tweak the lens to my real world use, but I didn’t have one instance where I felt let down by the AF in the lens in any and all lighting conditions.
Image Quality
In part I will let the images throughout this review and in the image gallery here speak for themselves. These images, unless otherwise indicated, have received little to no post-processing and mostly represent what came directly out of the camera. I think you will agree that the lens produces amazing images.
Before I hit the positives, let me offer up one caveat: if you were expecting this lens to be a quantum leap forward from the Tamron, you may be disappointed. The strength of the Tamron is that it offered very good optics in a reasonably lightweight and even more reasonably priced package. Optical performance was its strength, and that was true from 150mm to about 550mm, where optical performance took a hit but rebounded if stopped down a half stop to f/8. The good news here is that the Sigma is particularly strong by comparison towards the long end of the focal range and does offer better wide open performance at 600mm. There is a law of diminishing returns at work here, and the fact that I didn’t notice a big improvement over the Tamron by the new Canon 100-400L II (which offers prime-like quality) tells me image quality shouldn’t be your primary reason for making this upgrade. Even doing direct, head to head comparison on a tripod with mirror lockup I noticed very little difference between the performances of the lenses near the center in real world images. Here is a 600mm f/6.3 comparison in a controlled environment.
Note that I added 1/3rd stop exposure to the Sigma image to equalize the histograms due to a slightly different ISO value. The difference in lighting on the bird accords for some of the apparent sharpness difference. Reviewing the image as a whole shows a slight advantage for the Sigma in a few areas.
The Sigma resolves better near the edges according to the MTF and charts, but that is, in my opinion, an improvement that will rarely be put to the test by the primary use of these lenses. Edge performance is most important in landscape oriented lenses, and while these are very nice landscape lenses stopped down (more on that in a moment), that is hardly the primary purpose of these lenses. The resolution is a little more consistent across the frame with the Sigma, and I think the resolution is also slightly more consistent across the focal range.
Don’t get me wrong, here, because my intent is not to criticize. Even a minor improvement here equals an exceptional performance. The only way to beat the optical performance of this lens at 600mm at the moment is to buy a $10,000 600mm prime. There is actually only a minute difference in the image quality of this lens wide open at 600mm vs. the MK 1 version of Canon’s 600mm f/4L IS lens (though the Canon has a 1 ½ stop aperture advantage). The MK II is a different story (there is that quantum leap I’m talking about).
The resolution of the Sigma is very, very good, even towards the long end of the focal range. I am very pleased with the wide open performance throughout, and if you want that extra bit of sharpness at 600mm simply stop the lens down to f/8. I do think the lens has slightly higher contrast than that of the Tamron and images have a very nice, crisp look with beautiful color rendition. You won’t have any problem counting the eyelashes on wildlife. Take a look at these near 100% crops all taken from the long end of the focal range.
The image quality from the lens is the second aspect of the lens that has really won me over. Overall I felt like the images I got were slightly more consistently excellent than those I got from the Tamron. Bokeh rendition in the right settings is also very nice (take a look at this tasty bokeh image!) Some light processing to this image.
Here are a few more images straight out of camera that show off the nice bokeh rendition from the lens.
All in all I was thrilled with the images that I was able to produce with the Sigma. They just about made carrying it around worthwhile. I also used it in a series of landscape images in a few settings where wide angle lenses simply don’t do justice to the scene and was very pleased with the results.
I used the lens in both a school auditorium and an arena for a couple of events that I shot (this was not my primary lens for those venues!), and while this lens is not designed for that kind of work, I was pleased with both the speed and accuracy of the autofocus along with the overall results. My 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is still the king for event work in both focus speed and sharpness, but if you didn’t own a lens like that this one does a decent job in a pinch. I used it for some outdoor sports shooting (a casual softball game) and it performed very well for that setting as well. I found the lens did a good job in every situation that I put it, and this was another thing that impressed me.
The Sigma 150-600mm suffers in one unique area by comparison to the Tamron and Canon 100-400L II – vignetting. There is noticeably more vignetting in images from the Sigma (about 3/4 of a stop more than the Tamron), which really surprised me when I considered the much larger front element of the Sigma (105mm) compared to that of the Tamron (95mm). Fortunately this is easily correctable in post, but the challenge for some shooters is that with a slower variable aperture lens there will be quite a bit of shooting at higher ISO settings, meaning that correcting the vignetting at times might produce some noise in the shadow area. I haven’t personally noticed an issue with that, but the Canon EOS 6D body that I have primarily used is exceptionally good at high ISO performance. This wide open sample at 600mm f/6.3 shows the vignette.
This lens has no other optical issues to criticize. I did not notice any kind of chromatic aberrations or fringing in any of the shots I took with the lens. The expensive elements and coatings on the lens are doing a great job here. The lens has excellent contrast in all settings, and this makes a big difference in images taken with the lens really “popping” and looking sharp and vibrant. It is far more rare to get the sun in the frame with the narrow angle of view of an ultra-telephoto lens like this, but in the rare occasion where I did put a bit of sun into the frame I had no issue with flare or ghosting. It just takes great pictures, period.
I should also note that while the Sigma doesn’t have the exceptionally low minimum focus distance of the Canon 100-400L II (3.2 feet) or its exceptional maximum magnification (.31x), but it does slightly improve on the Tamron’s 8.86 feet/.20x with an 8.53 feet minimum focus distance and shares the .20x magnification figure. The Canon is the outlier here, but it also has a radically different focal range. The Sigma’s figures compare very favorably with other lenses reaching 600mm.
Optical Stabilizer and Aperture Observations
Sigma makes the claim that the lens has an accelerometer built into the optical stabilizer system (OS) which enables better panning on either axis. This should help in tracking birds (a big deal for a lens like this!) Of the three telephotos that I have tested this year (including the Tamron and the Canon 100-400L II), the Canon takes the prize for me in this department. Yes, I know the Canon has a shorter focal length, but this observation was also true when using a 1.4x tele on the Canon (making the effective focal length on the long end 560mm). The Canon does the best job of stabilizing the image in the viewfinder, which is really important when you are trying to get accurate focus on a distant subject with a long telephoto lens. The Sigma and Tamron are probably roughly equal in this regard, but the Sigma presents a bit more of a challenge due to its heavier weight.
Don’t get me wrong; the Sigma’s stabilizer does a great job with the actual image capture (I had very images spoiled by camera shake), but I found the actual experience of using the lens a bit more challenging. This is more of a field observation and has little to do with trying to get a minimum shutter speed shooting a test chart or static subject. While that is an interesting exercise (in a vacuum), those of you that have shot long focal lengths know that the situations where you are going to be trying to use a 1/50th (or even a 1/150th) shutter speed are virtually non-existent. I suspect that Sigma was trying to find a balance where the stabilizer does not interfere with the natural amount of movement that is inherit in shooting wildlife, but I personally prefer more stability in the viewfinder.
In short, the stabilizer does an effective job, but the way it does it isn’t my favorite, particularly when you are trying to handhold such a hefty lens.
One other criticism of the Sigma came when I tested how long it held to each aperture. Both it and the Tamron (along with the new Canon 100-400L II) are variable aperture lenses. The Canon’s aperture doesn’t match up quite the same, but this chart shows that the Sigma holds on to each of the larger apertures for a shorter period than either of other lenses.
The winner of this comparison is the new Canon 100-400L II, which reaches its slowest maximum aperture of f/5.6 later than either of the other lenses (312mm rather than 184mm for the Sigma).
The Sigma 150-600mm hits its slowest maximum aperture of f/6.3 (one third stop slower than f/5.6) very early in its focal length (321mm) compared to 411mm for the Tamron. This is a bit puzzling considering the larger front element of the Sigma and its more robust dimensions. You would expect it to be the opposite. Ironically it is the lens with the smallest front element (77mm) that is able to hold to wider apertures the longest. I’m not sure how much any of this will actually affect your use of the lens, but it did count as one of my disappointments with the lens.
My common approach to variable aperture lenses is to just set the camera to the maximum aperture on the long end (f/6.3) and only stop down to wider apertures at shorter range if I need to. That way I don’t have to deal with the variable aperture and just treat the lens as a constant f/6.3 unless I actually need otherwise. At the least the Sigma is helped by having excellent image quality that allows you to shoot the lens wide open throughout the range and avoids the need for stopping down to get good sharpness.
Value and Conclusions
I believe the new Sigma 150-600mm Sport lens represents an excellent value for more serious shooters who want a premium lens that covers this focal length. It is a penny south of $2000 in the United States, but it is a LOT of lens for the money. The new Canon 100-400L II is an amazing lens that I intend to add to my kit (it suits my own needs a bit more than the Sigma), but I can’t really say that it is a better lens or even better constructed than the Sigma, and it costs $200 more despite having 200mm less reach on the long end. The Sigma comes with a nice case and a carrying strap as well, two things not included with the Tamron. So yes, it is expensive, but when I compare the substance of the lens even to a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens (which costs roughly the same if not more), it seems like the consumer is getting a great value. The Tamron 150-600mm is still an incredible value, but after spending time with both lenses I feel that the Sigma is, in its own way, an equally good value. I don’t think there is a bad choice between these three lenses but rather what best suits your needs and budget.
All in all I consider this lens to be a smashing success for Sigma. It has some shortcomings (its vignetting, particularly slow aperture, and heavy weight), but the tradeoff for that weight is a beautifully constructed lens that really feels like a match for some of Canon and Nikon’s best made lenses. It has great optical performance that is going to make a lot of photographers very happy with the images they bring home (this would be an amazing safari lens!) That focal length is really quite incredible, and the fact that you can use the lens wide open at all focal lengths without hesitation is very empowering. The price may seem high in comparison to the Tamron, but after using this lens I feel that the price is actually extremely reasonable for what you are getting, and would probably still be a decent value if it were $1000 more. Not everyone can afford that extra money, and if you can’t, know that you can still get a very nice lens in the Tamron 150-600 VC or even the Contemporary (what does that mean?) 150-600 OS lens from Sigma. If you can afford the extra money, however, know that what the Sigma 150-600 Sport offers is a very credible upgrade in every way over those lenses. The one thing that may stop this lens being accessible to many photographers, however, is the weight. It is a very heavy lens, but if you have the means to support it in either your biceps or your tripod, it is a fantastic lens that will delight you with all that it has to offer. This lens is far more relevant than what I expected. Bravo, Sigma!
P.S. This lens has been very hard to find in stock, but B&H does have stock of it at the moment. Strike now while the iron is hot!
Pros:
Exceptional, pro-grade build quality
Excellent and consistent optical performance throughout the frame
Completely silent and accurate autofocus
Chromatic abberations exceptionally well controlled
Excellent dust and moisture resistance
Very strong flare resistance
Ability to customize lens settings through the Sigma USB dock
Inclusion of nice, padded case and carrying strap
Effective image stabilizer
Strong cost to performance ratio
Cons:
Very heavy – difficult to handhold for extended periods
Somewhat heavier vignetting than the competition
Gets to smaller aperture values (e.g. f/6.3) more quickly than competition
Very pronounced zoom creep
Optical stabilizer could stabilize the viewfinder image a bit more
Review notes: I owe a big debt of gratitude to B&H Photo for getting me a copy of this lens as soon as one became available. The demand has been very high, but they got it done! I reviewed a retail copy of the lens, and all photos shown in the review or image gallery were taken by me during the review period.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52014 in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Lens Review
Dustin Abbott
August 27th, 2014
The Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD
The travel lens/superzoom category is a fairly hotly contested category in the crop sensor market. This stands to reason; a person can enter the DSLR crop sensor market at a fairly reasonable price. Even an entry level full frame camera, by comparison, will cost at least three times as much. It is that investment factor that tends to influence the type of lenses that buyers in each of these categories gravitate towards. Crop sensor shooters are far more likely to seek an “all-in-one” solution.
Let’s say, for example, that a new DSLR buyer’s last camera was a superzoom compact, which sported a 25x or even 50x zoom ratio. That 18-55mm kit lens on their new DSLR is going to feel awfully confining! I remember the first time I twisted the zoom lens while looking through the viewfinder of my new Rebel and thought, “That’s it?” If this is you, then I’ve got very good news for you. The new Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Macro offers a big enough zoom range for just about anyone…and the biggest zoom range for any DSLR lens to date.
Building fixed lenses for the tiny sensors in compact cameras in no way compares to developing interchangeable lenses for the much larger sensors in DSLRs. Canon’s own largest superzoom is the EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens, an 11x zoom range. Tamron pushed the envelope about five years ago when it introduced an 18-270mm lens, which offered a 15x zoom range. I owned that lens, and found it a fairly competent performer and better than an EF-S 18-135mm lens that I was trying at the same time. It’s biggest downsides were massive amounts of distortion on the wide end (a highly complex “moustache” distortion that was hard to correct), a buzzy micro motor for focus, and middling image quality. The focus range and VC were great, and that lens proved popular enough that Tamron followed it up with a PZD version a couple of years later that marginally improved the optics, compressed the size a bit, and introduced the PZD (Piezo) drive that dramatically improved the autofocus in both speed and noise.
16mm
300mm
Tamron is once again pushing the envelope, however, with what might be the ultimate travel lens for crop sensor cameras, the 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD MACRO Lens. Not only did Tamron manage to add an extra 30mm on the long end, they also attacked the other end of the focal length spectrum and added a wider angle of view. While 16mm may not sound drastically wider than 18m, trust me when I say that this is the bigger accomplishment of the two. The zoom range is now 18.75x, with a 35mm (full frame) equivalent focal length of 25.6-460mm. Wow!! This is biggest range available in the world in a DSLR lens. When you are traveling, that extra angle of view on the wide end is going to make a BIG difference for getting landscapes and architectural shots. Furthermore, Tamron has managed to mature this lens despite pushing the envelope with the focal length. It is more mannerly than ever, with less distortion, better build quality, and better optics. The distortion on this lens is readily apparent with the classic “brick wall” test, but the second shot shows how easily it is corrected in Lightroom or Photoshop with the standard profile:
16mm Uncorrected
16mm after standard Lightroom Profile
300mm Uncorrected
300mm after standard Lightroom Profile
This test will also give you an idea of what kind of light fall-off (vignetting) to expect and how it will correct in Lightroom.
Let’s dive in and take a look at the lens itself:
Nicely balanced on a body like the 60D
No sign of lens creep
A handsome lens
16-300mm
Metal mount with rubber gasket
The Tamron 16-300mm
First of all, I view this lens in a slightly different light than its full frame brother. That lens is priced in a slightly more premium range, and I compared it to Tamron’s more premium options. It’s build quality was a notch or two below those options. I’m inclined to view this lens from a different perspective, however, as it is really a replacement for existing lenses in this category and it’s price is a good 25% lower than the full frame lens. The build quality on this lens is a step in the right direction. It has a very clean, more modern look with light flocking on the barrel and a handsome tungsten ring which is Tamron’s new “signature” look. It’s look is sleeker and more modern than the earlier 18-270 models. It is smaller and lighter than Canon’s own EF-S 18-200mm Lens lens despite that lens’ considerably smaller zoom range.
By the way, the design, feel, and dimensions of the two new Tamron all-in-on zooms (the other being the newly released 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD Lens for full frame cameras) and nearly identical…to the degree that they are visually almost indistinguishable. Their weight is identical [19oz (540g)] and are roughly 3.8″ (99mm) in length. The crop sensor lens is 3mm longer (very, very hard to determine by just looking) and has a slightly wider zoom ring. They both feature a double barrel zoom extension (which effectively doubles the length of the lens) and a 67mm plastic filter thread (non rotating – circular polarizer users rejoice!). Both feature a zoom lock (that locks only in the fully retracted [16/28mm] position), a lightly flocked engineered plastic barrel (just like every other new lens!), and, in a new step for the series, a rubber gasket around the metal lens mount to help provide moisture resistance. By the way, no EF-S lens (crop sensor) to date has featured moisture resistance, so this gives Tamron a nice advantage provided you are using one of the weathersealed crop sensor bodies (7D, 60/70D, etc…)
On that note: short of disassembling the lens, one has no way of really determining the degree of weathersealing on any given lens. That being said, Tamron is sticking its neck out a bit more than other manufacturers when it makes this claim because they back their products up with a six year warranty (in North America). That’s a very long warranty period on a lens whose main purpose is travel!
My initial finding with both lenses was that the zoom extension action was quite stiff, particularly starting about the 70mm position, but with a bit of use that has loosened up nicely, so don’t panic if your copy is similar. I don’t expect that action to ever equal the smoothness of internally zooming lenses, but my initial concerns about the zoom action have been allayed. The zoom action after a few weeks of use is nicely damped. On a positive note, I seriously doubt zoom creep will be an issue for these lenses – the zoom action is very sturdy and the front element is not particularly heavy. In fact, I took photos of both lenses in the fully zoomed position “standing on their heads” and neither gave an indication of budging. Both lenses have two switches on the left side of the barrel, an AF/MF switch for the focus and an ON/OFF switch for the VC (vibration compensation). They also feature a distance window in both feet and meters. The lenses include a petal shaped hood that is relatively small and unobtrusive and reverses in a compact fashion. The lenses may look virtually identical, but if you look at the underside of the lenses you will spot one difference: the full frame lens (28-300mm VC) says “Made in Japan”, while the crop sensor lens says, “Made in China”. This may be one reason for the over $200 premium of the full frame lens over the crop sensor.
Tamron has developed a sterling reputation for its highly effective image stabilization systems known as VC (Vibration Compensation). VC is effective at both presentation camera shake and does a great job of “freezing” the image in the viewfinder. Tamron has included another highly effective system here, although my copy did have a slight “jumping” on occasion when stabilization begins that is (in my experience) probably copy specific and seems to have faded after a bit of use. Tamron claims 4 stops of assistance, and that seems about right here.
This lens features a Piezo drive (PZD) to power autofocus. There is nothing to complain at in this regard. The focus is fast and accurate, and the motor is very nicely quiet. The Canon EOS 60D body that I am using for this review does not feature AFMA capability, and I do feel that this lens (like every other I’ve used) would benefit from a slight adjustment to the body to further tune focus accuracy. A 7D or 70D body (along with older models like the 50D) feature this capability.
Both Tamron and Sigma have had a bad habit of overusing the term “macro” in association with their lenses. Macro is typically defined as at least a 1:5 and really more of a 1:1 reproduction value. Real macro lenses not only focus closely, but resolve strongly at high magnification and are optically corrected for shooting at macro distances (flat plane of focus). By contrast, these manufacturers (both of which DO make some very good macro lenses) have tended to throw the word “macro” on any of their lenses that happen to focus reasonably close. This lens is no exception, with the word Macro at the end of the name of the lens on the box. This is not a macro lens in any real sense of the word, but what it does happen to be is a lens that has an exceptionally useful close focus distance and maximum magnification. It focus down to 15.3″ (.39m), and does have a very high reproduction value of 1:2.9 or over .34x. This is a class leading score, even if not technically a true macro lens. For many people this will probably be as much macro performance as they need, although the resolution at this range in no way competes with a true macro lens. Users will find this very useful, and it is definitely a strength of the lens.
Nice background blur
A lot of detail
Near Macro Look
I do not find that this lens resolves quite as highly as its full frame brother. This may be due in part to the nature of the full frame vs. crop sensors, but I suspect there are a few more optical compromises here to achieve that greater focal range. It’s optical formula is slightly less complex, with 16 elements in 12 groups (vs 19 elements in 15 groups). But this observation only comes because I have both lenses at the same time. A more “apples to apples” comparison is how this lens compares to its 18-270mm predecessor, and an examination of Bryan Carnathan’s chart testing reveals that this lens is sharper all around at 16mm (most noticeably in the center of the frame ) while delivering a similar performance at the 270/300mm end of the zoom range other than slightly more green fringing. The telephoto end exhibits both a loss of contrast and an addition of chromatic aberrations that diminish apparent sharpness. In field testing I have definitely noticed the reduced contrast in telephoto shots. These optical imperfections are far less pronounced at 200mm. This is a mixed bag to me: it’s impressive that Tamron has managed to go wider and get improved image quality on the all-important wide end, but the extra 30mm on the long end has produced a less impressive result and seems like more of a marketing gimmick than a substantial addition. I noticed far less fall-off on the telephoto end with the 28-300mm lens.
Lack of Contrast
I was somewhat disappointed with this performance mostly because I was so impressed with the performance of the 28-300mm. The 16-300 VC compares favorably with its direct competition, including a similar performance through 200mm when compared to the Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens and slightly better performance than the Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM. It’s image quality is par for its class (slightly better on the wide end), but not quite at the level that I am accustomed to seeing from my personal collection of glass. Are you a pixel peeper? (If the answer to this is yes, an all-in-one solution is probably not for you…but here’s some food for thought…read on…)
In fact, if I were a crop shooter and had any thought that I might upgrade to a full frame body in the future (or if the telephoto end were a priority), I would go ahead and spend the extra money to purchase the 28-300mm VC. No, 28mm is not particularly wide on a crop sensor (44mm full frame equivalent), but it is still usable. What this solution does do is enable you to take advantage of the improved optical performance of a lens that has been engineered to perform on a more demanding full frame sensor. Less CA, better contrast, and less optical compromises. There will also be better performance on the telephoto end of the range (and thus slightly better “macro” performance). No, the zoom range isn’t as mind blowing, but if image quality is a priority, it is still a very compelling option that also “future proofs” your investment.
Bear in mind that I’m not a crop shooter (other than my EOS M). I used to shoot a 60D body, but after years of shooting FF bodies, I was surprised by how much noise was present even at lower ISO levels on a 60D and didn’t find the color rendering as complex as my usual bodies (In fact, right before publication I mounted the lens on my EOS M and found the images to be a little cleaner). This is one of those samples:
Part of my disappointment is very likely due to some of the limitations of the crop sensor, and I note from user reviews on places like B&H and Amazon that most users are quite pleased with the image quality. Images like this look pretty good:
In conclusion, this lens provides a compelling option for anyone looking for an all-in-one or travel lens for their crop sensor camera. The lens is sturdily built yet light enough that no one is going to complain about its weight. It is evidence of how rapidly lens design is progressing, as it features a quick and quiet focus motor, excellent image stabilization, and even some degree of weather sealing to help protect against the elements. The work that Tamron has done on the wide end of the focal length is impressive, although I’m less impressed with the compromises that stretching the telephoto end out further have produced. There is no question, however, that this is a stunning focal length in a compact, attractive body. Tamron’s superzoom lenses have been their best selling products in recent years, and I see no reason for that to change any time soon. Though not perfect, the 16-300mm VC is a solid evolution of this bestselling line and brings some very tangible improvements to the table. This lens should be at the top of the list for anyone looking for a new lens in this category.
[youtube=http://youtu.be/oM62LdkCqog]
Pros:
Killer focal length.
Goes wider than any competitor
Fast, quiet piezo drive motor
Very nice fit and finish
Weather sealing
Highly effective image stabilizer
Shows no inclination towards zoom creep
Internal focusing means that the filter thread won’t rotate
Cons:
Longer end of zoom range lacks micro contrast
Softer image quality towards 300mm
Some chromatic aberrations
Price at the higher end of class
Note: I have reviewed a retail copy of the lens provided courtesy of Amplis Foto in Canada:
Images have received minimal processing to better reflect the actual performance of the lens.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52014 in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! If you want to go directly to this lens, click here
Purchasing your gear through Amplis Foto (in Canada) and B&H (in the United States and abroad) through these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. Thank you for your support.
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I pay very close attention to news in the camera industry.I also interact with a lot of different photographers around the world via the Internet.I can safely say that this lens, the Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD, has caused more of a stir in the community than anything Tamron has released in a long, long time.
That’s not to say that everyone was thrilled.
People, being, well, people, react to news in a variety of ways.Some photographers were thrilled and excited. “That’s an amazing focal length!”
And it is.
150mm is not so long as to make the lens unusable in a variety of situations, and 600mm?Well, let’s just say that 600mm is the number that got people really excited.That 4x zoom range covers a host of useful focal lengths.
But then there are the pragmatists.The “realists”.They dismissed the lens before any photos were shown and one word of review text was written. “It’s a Tamron.”“I’ve owned a Tamron super-tele before, and it was soft, slow, etc…”And it’s true that the Tamron brand has not been previously associated with high end telephotos in the past.They have primarily been considered budget options, with lower end build and handling along with merely acceptable optical quality.
The announcement of the (amazing) price brought similar reactions.
Many people were thrilled.Photographers are used to sticker shock, and no segment has more sticker shock than the telephoto range, where long glass can tip into the 6 figure range.The new Tamron even undercut the price of Canon’s aging 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS lens although it offers a much more exciting zoom range.Many owners of that lens have been awaiting a replacement with superior optics and a more effective image stabilizer, not to mention that the push/pull design of that lens is very polarizing.
But the low price was nothing more than another red flag to the “cup-half-empty” crowd.They viewed the excellent price as further evidence that the lens simply wouldn’t be very good.“The price is low because the lens is garbage.”“The lens won’t focus quickly.”“It won’t be sharp.”
The truth of the matter is that none of us knew whether Tamron had a hit or not; we just knew that Tamron was swinging for the fences with this one.Many of us hoped that due to the very positive trend in recent Tamron offerings that maybe, just maybe, Tamron had a game-changer.
After shooting more than a thousand frames with this lens, I believe that I can safely say that Tamron does in fact have a game-changer on its hands.This lens defies all expectations (including my own).It is an excellent telephoto zoom lens that reaches a focal length longer than what most people currently own at a price that they can probably afford.That makes it fairly unique.But what really sets this lens apart from previous budget offerings is that, other than price, there isn’t really anything “budget” about it.I am very privileged to get to share one of the very first thorough reviews on a lens that has convinced me.
The Basic Facts
My test will be conducted on a Canon full frame sensor camera. Those of you that are shooting crop sensor bodies can expect a field of view similar to 240-960mm (WOW!) on Canon crop sensors or 225-900mm on a Nikon or Sony crop sensor. Understand that apparent sharpness will seem higher on a full frame body but optical imperfections tend to be diminished on crop sensor bodies. Depth of field is also smaller at comparative apertures on a full frame sensor.
Long and Lean
Elegant new brushed aluminum Tamron logo ring.
Switches
Tripod Collar
Zoom lock – memorize this location!
Focus distance window
Large 95mm front element
Fully zoomed out.
600mm!!
Rubber gasket at lens mount
Dwarfs the 70-300L
That is one big (and dusty) front element!
This is not a small lens.No lens that reaches 600mm is.But after having lugged it around the woods for a while, I believe that Tamron has struck an excellent balance between size, weight, and optics.Any zoom lens is a delicate balance of compromises.A prime lens can be built and optimized for one focal length, but a zoom has to cover any number of eventualities.A lot of superzoom compacts cover this focal length (and beyond), but they emphasize compact size over optical quality, and as a result are simply not even under consideration by most discerning photographers.The Tamron weighs right under 69 oz/1951g.That is 4.3 pounds.To give you some comparisons:the 100-400L weighs right under 1400 grams, the 70-200mm f/2.8LII weighs about 1500 grams, while the 300mm f/2.8L II weighs 2350g.The new Tamron isn’t light, but neither is it overly heavy.It is slightly over half has heavy as the new 200-400mm f/4L + 1.4x (3620 grams).The front element is large and takes a 95mm standard filter (which will set you back a bit!).If you struggle to carry a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens, then you probably will need to use a monopod or tripod.If you are accustomed to using a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens, I doubt that you will notice the extra weight very much.I spent hours trekking through snow with the lens on a Black Rapid strap and didn’t notice the carrying weight at all.
It is not particularly short, either.At its most compact, (retracted), the lens is about 10.25in/26cm).That makes it about 2 ½ inches/6cm longer a typical 70-200mm f/2.8 lens.The lens is not internally zooming, however, so it grows by an additional 3 inches/8cm at its maximum length.There is also a large lens hood that can be attached that is a little over 4 inches/10.5cm long.So at its maximum length with the hood attached, this is a nearly foot-and-a-half long lens.It should be noted that the lens is both lighter and shorter than most of the longer length prime lenses. (Owners of the 100-400L should also note that while this lens is a bit longer than the 100-400L retracted, the extended lengths with/without the hood are nearly identical.)On a very positive note, while the inner barrel does extend during zooming, it does so smoothly and without any hint of wobble.All of this news so far is either good or bad depending on what end of the priority list you fall on.If you were looking for compact, you might be disappointed.If you were looking for quality optics, then this is very good news.There is a practical limit to how compact a lens can be and still be optically superior. But as the little EOS M finds out in the picture below, this is a BIG lens.
Bad news/good news aside, the construction quality of the lens is, in my opinion, all good.It is dense without being unnecessarily heavy.The lens construction is both handsome and of good quality.The barrel has a nice texture to it, and the focus and zoom rings are made of nicely ribbed rubber.Roger Cicala has recently debunked some of the marketing myths regarding lens construction from the unique perspective of someone who has actually broken down scores of lenses.It’s worth a read if you want to look here.With that in mind, Tamron does claim dust and moisture resistance for this lens and it does have a rubber gasket near the bayonet mount to help eliminate moisture and dust entering the lens and/or camera body.This is always a welcome sign, as it means that the company is doing its best to go the extra mile in building a quality lens.
I have used it in very difficult weather conditions (extreme cold, snow, and rain) without a hint of complaint from the lens.The lens also has a metal bayonet mount (in Canon [tested here], Nikon, and Sony mounts) and a removable tripod collar.One notable departure from previous Tamron lenses is that a very elegant brushed aluminum ring replaces the gold ring.I personally like the change.It is more subtle from a distance but much more elegant close up.This is the first Tamron lens I have seen that sports this new cosmetic touch.It is constructed of the typical modern mix of high strength engineered plastics and metal, and, frankly, it feels just like all the other quality lenses that I have purchased in recent years.There is no hint of “budget” in its construction.While I am only evaluating the lens from outside, I personally feel confident that the lens should hold up well and survive the inevitable bumps that a lens this size will endure.Something worth noting is that this lens will have Tamron’s industry best six year warranty.That certainly helps with peace of mind!
The lens features three switches on the left hand of the barrel.The top switch is a focus limiter with two positions, Full and 15m to ∞.Using this while shooting distant wildlife will help AF speed.The second switch is the AF/MF switch, which is less important on a lens like this that allows full time manual override, but there might be situations where you want to turn off autofocus.The third switch is an on/off for the VC, which we will get to in a moment.On top right of the barrel is a zoom lock.When carried (like I often do) in a strap or harness, the lens will exhibit zoom creep, so this is an important (and necessary) inclusion.
There is a distance marker window and the aforementioned tripod collar.Tamron collars are well designed and highly functional.It is very handy to use this with a monopod.When kept loose it allows for very easy rotation of the camera to change aspect.The zoom ring has markers for 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, and 600mm.
The focus ring is the closest to the camera body (not my favorite trend, but it is definitely a trend in recent lenses).It is about 1 inch/2.5cm wide, and moves very smoothly at all times.The zoom ring is about 2 ¼” in/5.7cm wide, and while there is more resistance than an internally focusing lens, the zoom action is smooth and nicely damped.I did notice a bit more resistance in extreme cold (-20C and beyond), but that is hardly unusual. Zoom rotation direction will (per usual) be the same as Nikon and opposite from Canon.
I should also point out that the lens has an excellent minimum focus distance of 2.7m (9 feet), which gives it a greater maximum magnification factor (1:5) than almost all of its competition.That degree of magnification is very handy, and it interesting to shoot a near macro type shot from almost nine feet away!Most importantly, however, it means that framing (and filling the frame) with small animals (squirrels and birds) is very achievable.
Fine Detail
Each pod is about 3 inches
Nice, soft bokeh despite stopping down
Great detail zoomed into this boar’s face
Beech leaf provides scale
Tiny seed pods on a dead lilac bush
AF and Focus Speed
Before I write this section I want to give a disclaimer.I have virtually no experience with high end super-tele primes.Wildlife/bird photography is far from my primary pursuit as a photographer.I own many very fast focusing lenses, but the closest lens I personally own to this lens is the very excellent Canon 70-300L.Furthermore, I use Canon EOS 6D bodies, and while they are excellent cameras, they are far from beings equals of 5DMKIII or 1DX (or 7D/70D, for that matter) bodies when it comes to AF.
This was an area that I was prepared to be disappointed in.My experience with Tamron’s Ultrasonic Silent Drive (USD) focus motor has overall been quite positive.They are generally just a hair slower than Canon’s USM motors and are extremely quiet in operation.USD is a huge step forward from the micro motors that Tamron used to use, which were very “buzzy” and fairly slow (particularly on their original 70-200mm f/2.8 lens).But this type of lens is a whole new challenge.The glass elements (20 elements in 13 groups) are big and heavy in a lens like this.One of the biggest concerns amongst potentially interested photographers was focus speed and accuracy.But over my time spent with the lens I have been very pleased in that regard.I haven’t really thought about focus speed at all in the field because the lens has always just done what I wanted it to…and that is great news!
My Canon 70-300L has fabulous focusing.It is extremely fast.In a non scientific comparison I shot the two lenses side by side comparing focus speed going from one extreme to the other.The Canon is almost instantaneous in those situations.The Tamron?From 150-400+mm the lens is almost neck and neck with the Canon.Very impressive.At the extreme end the lens is slower when going from the extremes (about 15 feet out to infinity), but still focuses quickly (no more than a second).But more importantly the lens focuses extremely quickly at the smaller (and more typical) adjustments (not from one extreme of the focus range to the other).And this was without using the focus limiter.Here is a video to demonstrate the stellar focusing speed of the Tamron.
All pictures taken rapidly in this test were sharp and in focus (for both lenses). One of the most important takeaways from little example is that it demonstrates that there is no “final hunting” like some lenses exhibit. They get there fast, but hesitate before achieving final lock. The Tamron finds focus and locks without final hesitation.
I am not a birder, so I cannot comment on bird in flight (BIF) applications, but I can note that even at 600mm I was able to successfully track a duck diving into the water from the air using AF Servo (not necessarily a strength for my camera bodies!) and was very satisfied with my results.I have absolutely no doubt that the $6000-12,000 Canon/Nikon primes focus faster, but consider me very impressed with what Tamron has done with this lens.I feel that this lens would be up to all of my expectations for personal use. The inclusion of a focus limiter switch will further help in certain situations.
Oh, and by the way, my previous best option for longer range shooting was the 70-300L + a Kenko teleconverter (getting me to 420mm), and focus speed with the Tamron is definitely better.
I also almost never encountered hunting with the lens.It locks on quickly and accurately.I found that it did a good job grabbing my subject even when there were obstacles like the branches in this photo:
Challenging focus situation…test passed.
Focus on the raven is strong and CA well controlled.
This is obviously important for the many people that will be using this lens to shoot birds and wildlife.This photo and it’s crop also reveals another optical strength for this lens:chromatic aberrations are very well controlled.The transition of dark limbs to a bright sky is very abrupt in this kind of shooting condition, but the chromatic aberrations look well controlled even in the 100% crop.
I did three AFMA adjustments with the Reikan FoCal software on both the wide and tele ends and got nicely grouped results.I would consider the focus accuracy very strong with this lens.My accuracy continued to improve as I become more comfortable with the lens, and in latter shoots with the lens my keeper rate was extremely high.This, too, exceeded my expectations.If, like me, you don’t have a lot of experience with shooting longer range telephotos, you need a bit of practice to develop technique (tuck those elbows!).Early on I felt the lens was less accurate, but I discovered with time that the problem had really been with me.By the end of my time with the lens I felt exceptionally good about the AF accuracy of the lens.
P.S.If you are curious, yes, the Tamron did continue to AF with the Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 1.4x attached, giving an incredible potential reach of 840mm.AF was clearly affected, however, most obviously when it came to achieving final lock.It tended to hunt for a second or two before locking.Metering is fine, but the EXIF data does not reflect the inclusion of the teleconverter in either focal length or aperture value.Image quality?Degraded (obviously, but still usable, particularly if stopped down).The question would be whether or not one would be better off just cropping.These two photos (boring though they may be) are of the lens at 840mm wide open (f/9 range).
Icicle @ 840mm – even more maximum magnification possible
Canadian slide @ 840mm
Vibration Compensation – Can This Lens be Handheld?
Another incredibly important inclusion is Tamron’s Vibration Compensation (VC) system for combating camera shake.Tamron’s VC system has received nothing but praise since its introduction, and this lens represents (by far) it’s most necessary application.Without VC, handholding 600mm is virtually impossible.It’s not that you can’t combat camera shake with shutter speed (provided you have great light), but the greatest challenge is try to frame your subject.The viewfinder image is constantly in movement.As a result, Tamron’s VC has never been more necessary than on this lens.Tamron has come through with an excellent system that solves most all of the problems associated with handholding a lens.I say most for two reasons:first of all, no image stabilizer can ever eliminate movement of your subject.That movement becomes more pronounced with telephoto lenses, producing what is known as motion blur.If your subject is completely still, no problem, but with many subjects you will still want to keep your shutter speed high to eliminate movement on the part of your subject.I found that that I had an exceptionally high keeper rate with most subjects starting at 1/320th second, but obviously fast moving subjects (bird in flight) will require even faster shutter speeds.
The second issue was that I did notice a slight movement of the viewfinder before the image “locked” into place.This behavior is not unusual, per se, but is a bit more pronounced because of the extreme focal length.Tamron’s VC, as always, does a great job of locking your subject into place in the viewfinder, and this is true even out to the longer focal lengths.You can shoot the lens at low shutter speeds with VC, but you will probably find fewer applications for such shooting with a lens like this.In this case the primary application of VC is to stabilize the viewfinder and compensate for your movements to produce sharp images, and it works very, very well for that.I was able to shoot the lens almost exclusively handheld.Almost every shot shared in this review I took using the lens handheld (other than a couple using a monopod), and that is, I believe, the best testimonial for the excellent VC.
Variable Aperture Challenges
One thing this lens is not is “quick” in the aperture sense.It starts at a middling f/5 and ends up at an unusual f/6.3.This isn’t unusual for Tamron or Sigma, per se, as they offer several lenses with a maximum aperture of f/6.3.Canon and Nikon native lenses top out at f/5.6.That throws some people off, because they may have heard that their camera will only autofocus up to f/5.6, but this lens will actually autofocus on any DSLR; that is not a concern.
I would love to see that maximum aperture down to f/5.6, but the reality is that f/6.3 is only 1/3rd stop from f/5.6, so it isn’t actually a huge difference in terms of light gathering (the number looks worse than it is).Yes, some long telephoto primes have an aperture as large as f/2.8, and many of them are f/4.F/6.3 is 1 1/3 stops slower than f/4.That being said, at 10 meters, the depth of field using a full frame camera and this lens at 600mm, f/6.3, is 8.8cm.That’s less than 3 and half inches!At 20 meters’ distance it is still only 42cm (16 ½ inches).It is very easy to get separation from the background with this lens.This lens also benefits from the amazing advances in high ISO performance in modern DSLRs.You can get stunning pictures from this lens in most lighting conditions, although it obviously won’t shine in extremely low light situations. Another point to consider is that telephotos that are f/4 at 600mm retail for over $10,000!I doubt there will be too many potential buyers that are cross-shopping these products!
You might be wondering at what focal length the aperture changes.My tests show that lens is f/5 wide open from 150-225mm, f/5.6 from 226-410mm, and f/6.3 from 411-600mm.It actually only goes through only one full stop in its focal range, which actually makes it better than, say, the kit lenses that start at f/3.5 and work through to f/5.6.This means that those that are cross-shopping the 100-400L actually don’t really lose any light at all through the comparable focal range.
So yes, this is a variable aperture zoom lens with all that brings, but the reality is it is equal in aperture to both the 100-400L and 400mm f/5.6 prime (which costs about the same and lacks IS) at 400mm.It will also be more hand-holdable than either of those options because of the superior VC.
Can It Deliver the Goods?
All of these things pale in comparison to the most important question:“Is the image quality any good?”Prepare to be impressed, because this lens delivers an image quality far above its price point.It ticks all the right boxes.Sharpness?Check The lens is incredibly sharp throughout almost all the focal lengths. I am including a gallery of 100% crops from various photos in the reviews so that you can see the detail.But let’s also stop for a moment and take a look at a slightly more boring subject (the teddy bear is back) at each focal length marked on the lens.I have also attached 100% crops of the subject so that you judge fine detail.These images have had no profile added to them and have had no additional sharpening. This little series also gives you an idea of the focal range.
Tamron 150mm
Tamron 200mm
Tamron 300mm
Tamron 400mm
Tamron 500mm
Tamron 600mm
150mm Crop
Tamron 200mm crop
Tamron 300mm Crop
Tamron 400mm Crop
Tamron 500mm Crop
Tamron 600mm Crop
Now, for comparison purposes, here are the results from the excellent 70-300L at the 150, 200, and 300mm setting.
Canon 150mm
Canon 200mm
Canon 300mm
Canon 150mm Crop
Canon 200mm Crop
Canon 300mm Crop
I would give a slight edge to the Canon, but the difference is, at most, minimal, and that is very good news for image quality! The Canon 70-300L is a very sharp lens, and the fact that Tamron is staying close is excellent news, particularly since the Canon quits only halfway through the focal range of the Tamron.
Tamron 300mm Crop
Canon 300mm Crop
It is slightly less sharp at 600mm wide open, but stopping down even a half stop to f/8 restores excellent sharpness.Here is a comparison between 600mm wide open and stopped down to f/8.You can see that textures overall are a bit sharper and the bear has a little more “sparkle” in its eyes.
Tamron 600mm Crop
Tamron 600mm f/8 Crop
I can tell a difference at 100% magnification between 500mm and 600mm, but as many photos in this review demonstrate, the lens is perfectly usable wide open.I did not hesitate to shoot it wide open, and probably used it this way for about 50% of the 225 shots I took at 600mm.It is softer at 600mm than other focal lengths (unsurprisingly), but it is actually pretty decent at 600mm.That is another concern laid to rest.Here’s a series along with some crops to show you just that:
This gallery demonstrates that even worse case scenario really isn’t too bad with the lens. But at it’s best, this lens is very, very good! Throughout most of the focal range the lens is very sharp wide open.
Many, many times I got that pleasant photographer’s “rush” followed by an intake of breath when I zoomed 100% into photos on my big monitor at my workstation and saw tight, crisp detail…just how I like it!Once again my expectations were exceeded. Do yourself a favor and click on the images above and below and look at it in larger size. Above is 309mm, f/8, 1/320th second handheld and below is 400mm, f/5.6 (wide open), handheld at 1/400th second. The detail on my daughter’s face is simply fantastic!
Color rendition is excellent.Canada in January is hardly the best time of year to produce stunning color, but I have managed to find enough variety that I think you will be able to tell the excellent color rendering.
I found the Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 VC USD lens a very strong value when I owned that lens. It was like watching a video on xnxx69It did a lot of things very well, save one:bokeh in the transition zone.It tended to produce very busy looking bokeh.Tamron has avoided repeating that mistake with this new lens.It has nine curved aperture blades and it produces very nice bokeh.The transition zone is smooth (important with a smaller aperture zoom), and bokeh highlights are nicely round and remain so even stopped down by several stops.
Flare resistance is also very strong thanks to Tamron’s new eBand coating.I shot into the sun several times purposefully to test this and found strong resistance to both flare and ghosting.Contrast also remained strong.
Tamron seems to have checked all the boxes here. This lens is capable of taking beautiful photos, period. The only optical improvement I could really ask for is for wide open performance at 600mm to match the rest of the focal range.
I have read the rumor on the Internet (always dangerous!) that the lens is very soft in the corners on a full frame body. I’m sorry, but I just don’t see it. Here’s an example, shot handheld, 600mm, f/6.3 (wide open) – aka worse case scenario. The gallery begins with the original shot, then 100 % crops from throughout the frame, including the corners where the subject is still on the focal plane.
Original Image
Center Top of the Frame
Lower left (a little beyond the focal plane)
Top right corner
Lower right corner
Center
Let’s also have a look at the other end of the spectrum. This image is handheld, 150mm, f/5 (wide open), 1/400th second shutter speed. There isn’t much in the foreground because of the snow, but we will take crops from 1) Extreme upper left corner 2) Middle extreme top 3) Center of the image (focal point on the front end loader) and 4) Extreme upper right corner. I would love to take crops from the lower corners for you, but there wouldn’t be much there to see.
Test Image: 150mm @ f/5
Extreme upper left corner
Center Exreme Top
Center and focal point
Extreme upper right corner
I think that these examples should put to rest the (false) rumor that this lens is going to be complete garbage in the corners. I can only tell you what I have seen with my own experience (there aren’t reviews out there yet to compare experience with), but I have not observed any kind of unusual softness in the corners. For this price point the image quality is very hard to fault.
Now stop for a moment with me and reflect on the fact that this lens covers all the way from 150mm to 600mm.The ability to frame a shot like you want and still expect strong image quality is just fantastic.No prime lens comes close to providing the versatility that this lens delivers.That’s huge!
Conclusion
As you can tell to this point, I think this lens is pretty fantastic.I simply don’t have the budget to purchase many of the super-teles that cover this focal range, and furthermore, I don’t shoot this style of photography often enough to justify the expense even if I did.But this lens hits a sweet spot for me.It’s price is low enough to not only be affordable but also a small enough investment that you won’t feel like you have wasted your money if you aren’t shooting long distance every day. So if you can’t afford a “super-tele”, how about an “ultra-tele” (that’s what Tamron is calling this lens segment)?The preorder price in the United States is only $1069.It is about $180 more here in Canada, but this lens represents such a tremendous value that I have had a serious conversation with a friend in the industry about how it is even possible for Tamron to make a profit at this price.I personally wonder if they are not selling this lens at a loss to drive brand recognition.It’s that good.
Perfect?Of course not.One niggle is that the box contains the lens, the hood, tripod collar, and the paperwork (including a digital code for the SILKYPIX Developer Software – a nice touch for those who lack editing software).But there is absolutely no consideration given to how you might carry/protect the lens after you take it out of the box.There’s no case of any kind included.That probably will represent an extra expense for a lot of buyers.But when you come back to that price it seems somewhat petty to complain.
I’m sure others will think of some things to criticize that I haven’t, but this lens won me over. At first I was getting mixed results with the lens, and was a bit disappointed, but I began to learn better technique for shooting a longer lens handheld (get that shutter speed up to eliminate motion blur!!) and discovered that the real problem was me, not the lens. My final several outings produced exceptionally consistent results. I also discovered a few weird things that I had never considered before, like when you are shooting from a vehicle you have to consider difference in air temperature. I was confused at some mixed results I had gotten when visiting the very cool Parc Omega in Quebec to shoot wildlife. One series would produce sharp results, the next, shot only a few minutes later, produced very soft results. What was going on? At first I was disappointed in the inconsistency from the lens, but then I saw a pattern. I realized that the sharp series would be when I was shooting from my side of the vehicle. The lens would be outside the vehicle in very cold air (about -20C)…as were my subjects. The soft series? I would be shooting from the passenger side of the vehicle through the open driver’s side window, but there was about 3-4 feet of warm air (probably about 18C) in the vehicle. That large temperature variation (almost 40C) was causing distortion (astronomers call them “tube currents”) that affected the sharpness of my images. Having never shot in those conditions, I had never thought of that before. Maybe this little anecdote will help someone else.
Let’s break down the pros and cons:
Pros:
A truly fantastic price/value
Optical excellence throughout almost all the focal range
Versatility of a 4x zoom range
Reaches 600mm (900mm+ equiv on crop sensors)
Sturdy, weather sealed construction
Excellent VC
Better than expected focus speed and accuracy
6 year standard warranty in North America
Low CA and strong resistance to flare
Excellent color rendition
Smooth bokeh transition and highlights
Good minimum focus distance = good maximum magnification
Did I mention the price?
Cons:
Slight sharpness falloff at 600mm
Focus speed slightly slower towards longer end of zoom range
Exhibits zoom creep
No internal zooming means that overall length grows significantly
Case not included
95mm filters will be expensive
Maximum aperture of f/6.3 on the long end
Fairly big and heavy
I recognize that I am reaching on some of these cons, because some of them are just the nature of this type of lens, but I do want to reach as objective a conclusion as possible.The truth of the matter is that many of the cons are niggles and the strengths of this lens FAR outweigh the weaknesses.
The reality was that I was a little sad to repackage this lens and send it back.I am already making plans for how to get another copy permanently added to my kit!If you are looking for a reasonably low cost investment into the long telephoto field, look no further than this lens.If you are anxiously awaiting a replacement to your aging 100-400L, I would recommend giving this lens a serious look.Expect this lens to make a lot of noise.Tamron came out swinging this time! I have no problem recommending this lens.
FOR MY CANADIAN READERS: Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code:AMPLIS52014 in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, andis stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! If you want to go directly to the new Tamron 150-600 VC, click here: Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews! It is best for Canadian buyers to shop in Canada, as it ensures that you will have no question in regards to warranty service (and you will be dealing directly with Amplis Foto for that service.)
FOR MY AMERICAN READERS: I now have a relationship in place with B&H, one of the best photography retailers on the planet. I would appreciate if you could clink on the link below to buy this lens at a great price from them!
A note regarding the photos contained in this review:I like to do post-production on my images, but I recognize that this review is different than many of my other ones.This is a lens that is just coming to market, and most of you want to know above all else what the lens can produce…not what I can produce.I do shoot RAW, but all of the images in this review have had nothing more done to them than a typical RAW conversion (using the standard profile correction in Lightroom 5) an in some cases a slight exposure or white balance tweak.A couple of images have been cropped, but by and large these photos are as they came out of the camera.
————————————————————————————————————————–
Disclaimer:I reviewed a retail copy of the lens provided to me for review purposes.It was not specially selected for me and represents a typical example of the lens.I have not been compensated for this review and my conclusions were not influenced in any way.The opinions stated here are my own.I have tried, as always, to be as balanced and objective as possible in reviewing this lens.
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.