Yepp, it's springtime here as well and never before have I been so busy
capturing birdies right here in my own surroundings. This of course greatly
due to my new (for me, that is) tool, my Tamron 400/4. I guess it's
evaluation time.
I've used this lens for birds and nothing but birds. And I will continue to
use this lens solely for birds and possibly other wildlife. Film has been
exclusively Fuji Provia 100, sometimes push-processed 1 stop to ISO 200.
Overall handling and feeling is good and could have been great IF the tripod
mount had been mounted further to the front of the lens. As of now, this
lens does not balance very good and dips easily, your ballhead has to be
locked quite hard.
Weight of this lens is 2.4 kgs which actually makes it kind of lightweight.
But together with a 4 kg tripod+ballhead and other equipment, well, you're
not in for any longer hikes, that's for sure!
Internal focus fells very good, much better than in my previous experiences,
is very fast and takes some practice getting used to. With my Sigma 400/5.6
I almost always turned too far on the focus ring, I find I don't do this
with the Tamron, simply because of better feel. I did have some focusing
errors initially, but with practice now feel very confident. BTW, I've used
OM'4's with 2-4 screens.
90 0f the time I've used it with the 1.4X Sp converter, thus creating a
potent, relatively lightweight 560/5.6 lens. Some shots were made with the
Zuiko 1.4X (yes, it's fits) and the Zuiko 2X. Later, I also shot some
Dunlin's (small wader) with the 2X SP. I do have all converters, so thought
I might as well try them.
In field use (real life) the 560/5.6 is absolutely beautiful to work with
IMO. A great compromise between everything, but for real action-shots the
400/4 setting may be better if you can get close to the birds, that is. The
800/8 setting, hmm, view is extremely narrow, if the bird persists in moving
(he-he, do birds move?) you may very well loose the shot completely as you
face the risk of not finding it in the viewfinder, not to mention the slow
shutter speed and eventual blurring due to movements. Camera-shake is really
a problem at these focal lengths. And flying birds, well, jsut forget it
with 800mm! But the Dunlin-shots turned out good, I push-processed 1 stop
for this. For certain applications such as shy resting raptors, I will
continue to use 800mm.
Image-quality: in 400mm, even wide-open, excellent. Not much more to say,
really, seems very sharp and nice to me. No vignetting either.
With 1.4X's: Some degradation wide-open, but a very acceptable one. Some
vignetting, but it so soft, it's hardly worth mentioning. I haven't seen any
image-difference between using the 1.4x SP and 1.4x Zuiko, but as all
experiences have proved that a matched converter is better than a
non-matched, I've very reluctantly been using the Zuiko.
With 2X. Fair performance, better than I expected. But terrible vignetting
with the Zuiko, much less and same quailty with the (much cheaper) 2XSP.
Here the difference between a matched and non-matched converter really
shows. Oh, stopping down 1/2 stop at 800mm, increases sharpness
significantly.
Out of the very first roll that came out, one shot of tufted ducks taken
with 560/5.6 was published in a local magazine, the editor got remarks that
this picture was very sharp and easy to print.
One slightly annoying thing is the disassembling and assembling of the
adaptall ring when switching to or from converters, this really takes some
time in the field. I plan to do some formal testing on both 1.4X converters,
if the Zuiko equals the SP, the ring can stay on the lens making this switch
of course unnecessary. Then, when using two adapt-alls, I guess the process
can be made faster (I have to put fibre-glass in the screws in my second
specimen before using it).
I also have several sharp shots, and being sharp for the very reason that
that is a fairly fast lens compared to the Canon 300/4+2X with stabilizer
which seemed like a ligthweight high-tech alternative, even for me. But, not
only does this combo render rather soft images (yes, I've seen them) but
also is the slow speed of this lenscombo still evident when shooting birds.
I have a few perfectly sharp fences and branches taken with the Tamron with
a blurred bird on top, in all these cases I have succeded in getting at
least one of two perfectly sharp images. If using a slower shutter speed I
would have ended up with none. Which is just as I anticipated, there is no
substitute for fast speed lenses. (not to say that a stabilizing lens isn't
of great use, it's just that when shooting moving subjects it is of no
greater advantage).
The downside of it all, well, 2.4 kgs is 2.4 kgs. And it's quite bulky,
requires an enormous rucksack or whatever when travelling. Fortunately, OM's
are still OM's, just 750 grams with a Winder.
What matters most to me is of a lens performs well in real, life, for me,
that is, can I take succesful pictures with this lens? Does it match my
vision? Will I use it or is it too heavy, too cumbersome to take with me?
Well, the 560/5.6 with a monopod is a fantastic tool, perfect for stalking
in the bushes and should the light go down, the 400/4 is there with an
additional stop. The 800/8 (with SP2X, not the Zuiko) can be used from a car
etc with good results, so all in all I think the Tamron 400/4 is very
versatile tool for the wildlife photographer who insists on using OM gear
(and other brands) even in this field of use. I certainly have already made
many of my best bird shots ever just using it for two months. I'm just as
happy as could be.
Happy tele-shooting all
Ulf Westerberg
*****************************************************************
*** Nature- and Travel Photography
*** at www.start.at/westerberg
*****************************************************************
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|