OC_DesertWalker Loc: Ojo Caliente, NM

An interesting Winter and a personal attempt to determine if these new supper zooms are any good. Loving photography as I do and really wanting to know if these two new bad boys were any good, I spent a little gold, rented the Tamron and Sigma 150-600 lenses and gave them a go. In the meantime I was using the setup I own, the Nikkor 300mm f/4 (non VR) + 1.4x Nikkor TC. I was pleasantly surprised by both the Tamron and the Sigma. I also realized my Nikkor 420mm setup is also as good. Now I should add that I have a friend that has the new Canon 600mm f/4. And as much as I was very pleased with my results with these new lenses. His photos with the 600mm prime are clearly better. This should not come as a surprise, right?
So here I am, in a pickle, trying to decide quite what to do. One additional vexing problem is the new Nikkor 300mm f/4 VR. It's small enough to hike with. That makes telephoto available while hiking well away from the car. So it leaves me pretty much un-decided.
Meanwhile here are some photos, from the three lenses, Tamron, Sigma, and 300mm + 1.4x.

Tamron 150-600mm

(Download)

Sigma 150-600mm

(Download)

Nikkor 300mm + 1.4x

(Download)

Tamron 150-600mm

(Download)

Sigma 150-600

(Download)

Nikkor 300mm + 1.4x

(Download)

Tamron 150-600mm

(Download)

Sigma 150-600

(Download)

Nikkor 300mm + 1.4x

(Download)

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

Beautiful Photographs, Mario!

From where I sit, I think the Sigma is showing it's clarity over the Tamron.
But that's from here.
The Sigma appears to have a bit more forgiving DOF, to me.
Still, I wouldn't poo-poo any of your shots.
They are beautiful.
Thanks for sharing a very good comparison. :-D

I bought my Tamron last fall, when Sigma's offering was still a rumor. I'm just beginning to understand mine.
In your first shot, to me, the focal spot appears to be the wing near the body. As the head and eye is just barely softer.

But in Photograph 2, the Sigma appears to have quite a bit more in focus. Or a better DOF, in my opinion.

The Nikon with the TC appears to be no slouch.

But if I were you, and with your skills, I believe I'd opt for the Sigma.
Packing it around is of course, your call.
But for clarity, that would be my pick.

See how easy it is to spend somebody else's money? :lol:

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

With all these lenses, the sensor you are using, your technique, and specific circumstance will have a greater determination on your images than which of theses lenses you used !

It is a shame that Nikon put all that great technology in a new 300mm lens - when what they really needed was a 400mm ! !

jkoar Loc: The Gunks, NY

Seems like a quandary. The Tamron at $1000.00 vs the Sigma at $2000.00 with a better build and heavier vs the new Nikkor at $2000.00 with yet to be seen photos. Honestly, what you have now is quite respectable.

Sorry, can't help and am wrestling with this myself. MTShooter likes the Sigma. Maybe see his posts.

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

Don't miss Mark's Yellowstone trip either, with his Tamron. He is posting some outstanding captures.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-276434-5.html#4759162

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-276434-6.html#4765639

Haydon

Apparently there's a new 300F4 coming out from Nikon weighing in at a mere 1.6 lbs.

The only complaint with the new Sigma Sport is it weighing in at 6lbs. People prefer the Tamton for the weigh difference but oddly enough, it's seemingly fussy with some Canon models.

OC_DesertWalker Loc: Ojo Caliente, NM

So, all of these were with the Nikon D750 body, now at "the Dr's" for some intervention...

Thanks SonnyE, and I agree, the Sigma seems to hold the edge. One noticeable thing is the Sigma produces more contrasty RAW's.

But I gotta tell you the difference between 4 pounds (Tamron) and 6 pounds (Sigma) is more than the numbers seem to indicate.

Focus speed of the three, gut feeling level, and in order of best to least: Sigma, Tamron, Nikkor 300+1.4x.

I am happy with what I can get, image quality, with all three. I would love to have the 600mm reach plus versatility of zoom, but for now I sit on the fence trying to decide. Likely will get the Sigma, then upgrade the 300mm so I can take into the wilds with me.

jederick Loc: Northern Utah

Mario I'm tickled that I don't have your selection dilemma, these are all first rate. You obviously got the best out of each of them and thanks for the comparison photos.

Don't tell my wife but Nikon's new lightweight 300 f4 is piquing my interest! Just waiting to see some examples and reviews:-D

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

The Sigmas Docking feature is what really sets it apart - other than the weight !....

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

The $1000 Sigma Contemorary lens will also have the Dock - IF - it ever materializes !

SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA

For a D750, I would encourage the Sigma. ;)

OC_DesertWalker Loc: Ojo Caliente, NM

Yes, imagemeister, you and I think alike. The Sigma Sport holds the edge on the Tamron, despite it's weight. But once you realize you can't carry it anyway, it isn't going in the back-pack, it doesn't much matter if it weighs a little more. As for a new Nikkor 400mm, well it would end up being above $4K if it would be an f/4, so that makes it tough, for us amateurs.

OC_DesertWalker Loc: Ojo Caliente, NM

OK SonnyE, I'm going to pick on you :), sort of. Now I'd be happy with Tamron, take a smaller bite out of my wallet, and have the possibility of upgrading to the new Nikkor later. But... These gaal-derned lenses are pretty specialized. I don't do any sports photography, so it's birds for me. Does your Tamron see much use?

justabeginner

They all look great to me. Do you have any comparable photos with your friend's Canon 600 mm f4?

OC_DesertWalker Loc: Ojo Caliente, NM

I hear you jedereck, that new little 300 + the 1.4x would work so well together, and then no bigger than a 16-35mm f/4... Plus having 300mm or 420mm is like slow motion zoom? :)