Not Bad

[Hillbillygirl]

Thanks all for the kind words.

The Tamron is def a mixed bag. Def not what I am used to, but then again this is a $1200 lens. It does focus decently quick, but hunts a little in lower light. As for lower light this thing needs a lot of light. Not a problem if shooting with 5DMkIII as I just bump the iso up. It is quite sharp, and almost meets the 4005.6L in that department. The VC works very well and easily handheld down to /125 sec at 300-400mm shots and still blur free on still objects. It does have some vignetting if shooting in anything but a bright sky, but not a real issue, as easily corrected in post. Also would not be as noticeable if shooting a crop camera.
I would def recommend this lens to anyone in both Canon and Nikon mount for a cheap, good image quality alternative to a super expensive super-tele. also have the extreme versatility of that massive range on the zoom that comes in handy.

[Barefoot]

So graceful in flight. Beautiful.

Do you ever use teleconverters on your long glass, and if so, what does that do for auto-focus and image stabilization?

[Hillbillygirl]

Yes no matter what you say in regards to Gulls they are def one of the worlds greatest fliers.
As for Tc's on long glass. Was never a problem on the 500 f4 with a 1.4X and the 300 f2.8 could take a 2X and still be acceptable.
Now this Tamron I would never use a TC on, as it needs all the light it can get and is not a speed freak when it comes to focusing. The 400 f5.6L will take a 1.4X very well as it is a speed demon when it comes to focusing, and also razor sharp, so it does not hinder it much at all.

[QuietOne]

I'd seen a couple of reviews on the Tamron, saying it's a really good compromise zoom. It's on my list of "rent it and try it". Maybe towards the end of the year. You and it did a fine job on the gull.