al13

I am Looking at purchasing a telephoto lens and am trying to narrow down my choices. The two top are the AFP Nikon 70 to 300 4.5 5.6 E ED VR FX or the new Tamron 100 to 400. Is the Tamron too new to get true feedback? The reviews on line seem to comfirm that both are decent lens for their price range. I have a trip planned for the end of this month and will need some reach with hand held. And, using my D500 for wildlife, etc.

jethro779 Loc: Tucson, AZ

Not sure what you will be shooting, but neither will be long enough when you look at the photos after you have downloaded them. I have the 200-500 Nikon on a D7100 and still need to crop to get decent shots.

NatuRaOx2

I've read very good reviews on the new Tamron. I'd get it myself Tamron has of late been making some very good lenses. It's probably a much better lens.

ronsipus Loc: Mission Viejo, CA

As previously stated neither will keep you from having to crop your wildlife shots to have them large enough. However, that range is a great walk around lens. I would recommend you consider the tamron or nikon 28-300 as it gives you better shooting range with the same distance. I have had both lens for several years, started with the tamron and migrated to the nikon, and it is what I use 95% of the time. When I need significant distance I use my sigma sport 150-600 with a 1.4 teleconveter. If you want I can send you some shots taken with the 28-300 for you to look at and use in your decision making.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

You've read the reviews, so I won't post links, but I'd rely on a professional reviewer more than I would someone who owns the lens. How about the Tamron 100-600mm?

Sorry, but I couldn't resist posting links.


100-600mm Range -
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=15236
http://www.kruger-2-kalahari.com/tamron-vs-sigma-150-600.html
http://photo.net/equipment/150-600_lenses
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/latest/articles/tamron-vs-sigma-150-600mm-the-7-key-differences-48183
https://photographylife.com/nikon-200-500mm-vs-tamron-150-600mm-vs-sigma-150-600mm-c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLXocpM5xno
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_msTFAmwWY

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

The 70-300, Tammy, and Sigma 100-400 are ALL fine lenses ! I would get the Tammy and not look back.

ltcarizona

The BIGGEST thing you have to keep in mind with THIRD PARTY LENSES is that if for some reason damage is caused to the camera by the lens the Camera manufacturer WILL NOT UNDER WARRANTY fix the camera for free. You will bear the full costs. That being said third party lenses being produced in the computer age of today using quality glass can equal or exceed the camera manufacturer's lenses. I for one use and never had a problem with third party lenses, but I always do my research (extensive) to see what problems they are having with these lenses and how they are being fixed.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

I would go with the 200-500 Nikon. Outstanding lens for Wildlife. I use it.

OviedoPhotos

BrianFlaherty Loc: Wilseyville, CA

About 30+ years ago, I did an extensive "study" of which single lens I'd like to use while going walkabout on trips. . .at the time, I was shooting a Nikon F-3 and F100; and, a single zoom was both convenient and "adequate". . .Because I'm lazy and REALLY dislike changing lenses, I put a short zoom (18-35mm) on one camera; and, a long zoom (28-300mm) on the other camera. The two cameras, fitted as above were convenient; not too bulky; covered over 90% of the situations I encountered. I'm now using a D7100; and a D7000. . .and, still using the same lens configuration. . .And, I'm using the Tamron and Sigma lenses that I decided on more than 3 decades ago.

Even though I have changed cameras over the years, I'm still able to use virtually the same lenses (with minor changes as to DX or FX. . .depending on specific situations). . .A VERY nice aspect of both Sigma and Tamron is their lenses have retained both QUALITY and STYLE. . .Meaning that I have not had to spend much time "re-learning" about how to operate and/or apply a new lens!

It goes without saying that using ANY Nikon camera over the past 30-40 years (From my original "F" purchased in 1968, I have progressed through the F-3; F-4 and several "N's" and a D70 and D90); and, I only needed to learn about how to use any NEW "bells & whistles". . .Because the camera body feels virtually the same in your hand!

Briefly, I can say that either the Tamron or the Sigma will give you what you want without breaking the bank!

al13

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

I've been using the Tammy 150-600 G2 on a D7100 for several months now and love it. I still crop many photos. Get the longest you can afford.

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

Long=Heavy and/or Slow. If that is ok then there are lots and lots of choices. Until you get into the $5000-10,000 range, most of those long, heavy lenses will be f 6.3 and above. You will need a camera that is ISO friendly on less than sunny days.

Weight and portability matter for me. I am opting for the Nikon AF-P 300 mm f4 lens with a tele converter. Weight is about 30 ounces inclusive. Price, however is not as consumer friendly.

agillot

400mm is the minimum for birds , 600 is about right , tamron G2 150 /600 would be fine or something similar .

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

For wildlife, 300mm often just isn't enough... even on a DX camera like your D500.

Twice the price, but reaching a more realistic 400mm... the Tamron also can optionally be fitted with a tripod mounting ring. I consider that an essential feature with a lens of this length (especially on a DX camera... and the reason I'd rule out the Sigma 100-400mm that doesn't even offer an optional tripod ring).

AFAIK (I use Canon gear), Nikon AF-P lenses are sort of "entry-level", too. As you say, the Tamron is just starting to be delivered to a few users and there aren't a lot of reviews of it yet, but it appears to be a different level of quality and performance. The Tamron 100-400mm VC USD ($800 + $129 for t'pod ring) appears a lot more comparable to the Nikkor AF-S 80-400mm VR ($2300) or the Nikkor AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6 VR ($1400), than the AF-P 70-300mm VR ($400). Besides the lower prices, some advantages of the Nikkor 70-300mm would be it's smaller size and lighter weight.