Quantaray 70-300 mm DI f/4-5.6 (large images)

This particular lens I bought while on vacation in Orlando last Mar, I wanted to use the zoom as well as get into macro without spending too much on a lens. I knew this lens was rebranded Sigma or Tamron, the salesperson said it was Tamron since it came with a hood.

Didn't use the lens until about month ago when the weather got better and spring was in full swing. I like the lens alot and it has giving my son (11yrs old) and I some enjoyable time learning and taking pictures. The only complain I have is it's soft spot in the long end.

It's been a long time since I've posted some pictures in this forum so with no futher delay, here's my feeble attempt at photography. I hope you enjoy and please comment.

F13 1/90 ISO 200 at 260mm handheld



F5.6 1/500 ISO 200 at 240mm handheld. Some noticeable CA



F8 1/350 ISO 200 Macro mode at 260mm handheld and 100% cropped.



F16 1/180 ISO 200 Macro mode at 260mm and flash on using a tripod.

Wow, I didn't think that lens would be so good for macro. Really tempting at that price. I was rather set on the DFA100F2.8, the extra stops make a difference.

HonourableTyr said:

Wow, I didn't think that lens would be so good for macro. Really
tempting at that price. I was rather set on the DFA100F2.8, the
extra stops make a difference.

Click to expand...

I was as surprise as you are when I saw the images for the first time. I also have the DFA100 on my wish list, as well as the Bigma. The way I see it, it's a good learning lens without going breaking the bank.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8814446@N03/

Raw format processed through Silkypix with minor contrast, WB and sharpness adjustments.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8814446@N03/

rajojo ma said:

Raw format processed through Silkypix with minor contrast, WB and
sharpness adjustments.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8814446@N03/

Click to expand...

I really like the second bird picture and the bee (bumble bee?). As you point out, the bird picture has a bit of CA (more specifically longitudinal CA, aka purple fringing). But it is pretty easy to get rid of that in post processing if you want to. Since it is pretty obvious in this case and the picture so nice in every other respect, I'd definitely do it. Like you, I am a Silkypix user. But to remove purple fringing, I go to Photoshop.

I have the same lens but sold under the original brand name (Tamron). Purple fringing aside, I like it a lot. Never thought I'd use it much for macro. Doing macro with a long tele sounded a bit odd to me at first. But to my surprise, I find extremely useful for such purposes: You won't disturb the bugs (since you're about a meter away), it's easy to isolate the target from the background (which gets nicely blurry even at rather small apertures), you won't really lose DOF for the target as such (although one might think such would be the case), and it's easier to find the right angle if you don't need to get all that close. Only downside is that you have to use faster shutter speeds than you'd have to with a shorter lens.

Cheers,

Anders

Anders W said:

rajojo ma said:

Raw format processed through Silkypix with minor contrast, WB and
sharpness adjustments.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8814446@N03/

Click to expand...

I really like the second bird picture and the bee (bumble bee?). As
you point out, the bird picture has a bit of CA (more specifically
longitudinal CA, aka purple fringing). But it is pretty easy to get
rid of that in post processing if you want to. Since it is pretty
obvious in this case and the picture so nice in every other
respect, I'd definitely do it. Like you, I am a Silkypix user. But
to remove purple fringing, I go to Photoshop.

I have the same lens but sold under the original brand name
(Tamron). Purple fringing aside, I like it a lot. Never thought I'd
use it much for macro. Doing macro with a long tele sounded a bit
odd to me at first. But to my surprise, I find extremely useful for
such purposes: You won't disturb the bugs (since you're about a
meter away), it's easy to isolate the target from the background
(which gets nicely blurry even at rather small apertures), you
won't really lose DOF for the target as such (although one might
think such would be the case), and it's easier to find the right
angle if you don't need to get all that close. Only downside is
that you have to use faster shutter speeds than you'd have to with
a shorter lens.

Cheers,

Anders

Click to expand...

thank you for your comments.

my PP skills with photoshop is close to none. could you maybe show me how to remove those CA or direct me to a good tutorial on how to do it, i would reall appreciate it.

thanks.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8814446@N03/

Nice pix!

I have the Tamron version of the lens, and I find it really performs well.

I did notice that your shutter speed is very slow, however, especially for the long end of the lens. As a rule of thumb, of course, you should figure using the focal length as your minimum speed (so at 260 mm, you should be at least 250th of second, and really more like 500th for handheld. SR can help, but if you're shooting at 90th of a second, you're two stops off--that's pushing it.

You may find that your softness goes away if you can get the shutter speed higher. I certainly found that I had to be very careful with the shutter speed on the long end of that lens. At 300 mm, my every jitter shows in the image.

Enjoy!

dndixon

rajojo ma said:

my PP skills with photoshop is close to none. could you maybe show
me how to remove those CA or direct me to a good tutorial on how to
do it, i would reall appreciate it.

Click to expand...

Sure! Here's how to do it:

http://www.outdooreyes.com/photo26.php3

There are instances where the elimination of purple fringing may be rather tricky because the subject itself has purple hues. In that case, you have to take care so as not to throw out the baby with the bath water. But in most cases, your bird picture included, it is rather easy. Post the picture again when you have tried the technique so that we can all see how good it looks without PF.

Note: The link I pointed to says that purple fringing is a phenomenon specific to digital cameras and usually associated with over-exposure. Personally, I only partly believe the first claim and the second hardly at all. At least when speaking about pictures taken with the Quantaray/Tamron 70-300, I think it is safe to say that the problem is essentially due to the lens itself (although it may show up more vividly on a digital sensor than on film) and that it does not depend on the exposure level. As you might already have discovered though, it does depend on aperture. There'd be less of it in that bird picture if the lens had been stopped down a bit. Purple fringing is a weak point in the design of this particular lens. Fortunately, it is the only really significant drawback one and can rather easily be dealt with in post processing when it becomes annoying (as is far from always the case).

Cheers,

Anders

it looked pretty simple, i will give it a try this weekend.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8814446@N03/

dndixon said:

Nice pix!

I have the Tamron version of the lens, and I find it really
performs well.

I did notice that your shutter speed is very slow, however,
especially for the long end of the lens. As a rule of thumb, of
course, you should figure using the focal length as your minimum
speed (so at 260 mm, you should be at least 250th of second, and
really more like 500th for handheld. SR can help, but if you're
shooting at 90th of a second, you're two stops off--that's pushing
it.

You may find that your softness goes away if you can get the
shutter speed higher. I certainly found that I had to be very
careful with the shutter speed on the long end of that lens. At 300
mm, my every jitter shows in the image.

Enjoy!

dndixon

Click to expand...

you are so right about the shutter speed. my problem is that i'm so stuck in AV mode, need to venture into TV and manual mode as well. will have to experiment this weekend. thanks for the helpful advice.

rajojomanik

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8814446@N03/