Sigma 100-400 or Tamron 100-400 or...........
I went for the Tamron 150-600. I am shocked how sharp it is. I am very pleased with it on my D750 as it is the only non Nikon lens I have but I am not afraid to use it. It also focuses extremely close compared to any of my other telephotos. It focuses 3 times as close as my 550mm F4.
I liked the Tamron. I have it and took it up the Danube. Able to do both near and far with the same lens with great clarity. Bought it in Bradenton for the FL landscape around Myakka Park. Not sure of the spelling there w/o looking it up.
waynetgreen wrote:
Greetings,
I'm normally a landscape shooter but having recently moved to Florida, I am craving a telephoto to capture the amazing wildlife here. Can't justify the price tag on the Nikon 200-500 so I was considering either tne Sigma or Tamron 100-400. Reading the reviews, both lenses are almost identical including price and features. I have no doubt that both are a little soft at 400. Looking for real world experience from actual users. I'm not entirely sure that most online reviews aren't designed to sell equipment vs the actual truth. The lens will be coupled with a D750 and occasionally a D7100. Thanks in advance!
Greetings, br I'm normally a landscape shooter but... (
show quote)
dannac
Loc: 60 miles SW of New Orleans
Sigma 100-400 f/6.3 on my D7200
(
Download)
olemikey
Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida
imagemeister wrote:
Yes, and the Sony Clear Image Zoom will fill in the missing pixels for you on the crop - IF - you are shooting Sony and JPEG. - Have been using it for 5 years now ....
.
Gotta love the CIZ, I have no plans to get rid of mine!!
waynetgreen wrote:
Greetings,
I'm normally a landscape shooter but having recently moved to Florida, I am craving a telephoto to capture the amazing wildlife here. Can't justify the price tag on the Nikon 200-500 so I was considering either tne Sigma or Tamron 100-400. Reading the reviews, both lenses are almost identical including price and features. I have no doubt that both are a little soft at 400. Looking for real world experience from actual users. I'm not entirely sure that most online reviews aren't designed to sell equipment vs the actual truth. The lens will be coupled with a D750 and occasionally a D7100. Thanks in advance!
Greetings, br I'm normally a landscape shooter but... (
show quote)
The Sigma and Tamron 100-400s
are not identical in features.
If it were me, I'd buy the Tamron for one reason, for one thing that makes it different from the Sigma... The Tamron lens can optionally be fitted with a tripod mounting ring. It sells separately for $129, adding to the cost of the lens, but I wouldn't want a 400mm without a tripod ring.
Sigma doesn't offer a tripod ring for their 100-400mm and the lens isn't designed to fit one. Yes, there are some third party rings made for it ("iShoot" and "Elefront" are two brands). But those fit around the control pod of the lens, so it will not be rotatable to a portrait orientation (one of the primary purposes of a tripod mounting ring). The "Koebele Stativschellen" ring pictured above appears to allow rotation, but it's made of plastic:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07GCX56GM Further, the latest Tamron tripod rings, including the one for this lens, all have a built in dovetail to be compatible with Arca-Swiss quick release platforms. That saves having to buy a separate Arca-style lens plate (if you use the Arca-style QR system). Depending upon size and quality, those sell for between $30 and $50. Replacement tripod rings or ring feet costing from $75 to $150 or more from third party manufacturers and are another way to adapt some lenses to be able to use the Arca-style QR system. Since these are unnecessary in this case, the cost of the optional tripod ring might seem pretty reasonable.
WDCash
Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA
billnikon wrote:
Below is just some sample shots taken with this outstanding value lens. It really should cost more.
That Heron with the fish tail eye patch is priceless.
ceallachain wrote:
I liked the Tamron. I have it and took it up the Danube. Able to do both near and far with the same lens with great clarity. Bought it in Bradenton for the FL landscape around Myakka Park. Not sure of the spelling there w/o looking it up.
I live in Parrish, just visited Myakka. That's what got me craving a telephoto. Small world!
I use the Tamron 100--400 and am very happy. The main reason I would go with Tamron is their 6 year warrantee. I had a Sigma that was at Sigma repair more the once for the same problem and they charged me big bucks to fix the same problem that they never could fix from the beginning. Here is a sample of the Tamron at 352mm. Look at the download and you'll find nice, sharp detail.
I like Tamron better. I think it's morr of a preference like Canon vs. Nikon.
Will be snowbirding come January through May in Sarasota. See ya in the Park
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
WDCash wrote:
That Heron with the fish tail eye patch is priceless.
Thank you. Glad you liked it. Yeah, he played with that fish for about 10 minutes before he finally swallowed it. He was turned in the opposite direction and someone opened up with a load motor drive and he turned around, that's when I shot.
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
amfoto1 wrote:
The Sigma and Tamron 100-400s
are not identical in features.
If it were me, I'd buy the Tamron for one reason, for one thing that makes it different from the Sigma... The Tamron lens can optionally be fitted with a tripod mounting ring. It sells separately for $129, adding to the cost of the lens, but I wouldn't want a 400mm without a tripod ring.
Sigma doesn't offer a tripod ring for their 100-400mm and the lens isn't designed to fit one. Yes, there are some third party rings made for it ("iShoot" and "Elefront" are two brands). But those fit around the control pod of the lens, so it will not be rotatable to a portrait orientation (one of the primary purposes of a tripod mounting ring). The "Koebele Stativschellen" ring pictured above appears to allow rotation, but it's made of plastic:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07GCX56GM Further, the latest Tamron tripod rings, including the one for this lens, all have a built in dovetail to be compatible with Arca-Swiss quick release platforms. That saves having to buy a separate Arca-style lens plate (if you use the Arca-style QR system). Depending upon size and quality, those sell for between $30 and $50. Replacement tripod rings or ring feet costing from $75 to $150 or more from third party manufacturers and are another way to adapt some lenses to be able to use the Arca-style QR system. Since these are unnecessary in this case, the cost of the optional tripod ring might seem pretty reasonable.
The Sigma and Tamron 100-400s u are not /u ident... (
show quote)
Interesting, I shoot daily in Florida wetlands with a Nikon 200-500 on a D500 at a field of view of 750mm HAND HELD with no need for a tripod collar because I do not use a tripod.
I shoot at about 1/3000 to 1/4000 sec. and get tack sharp images. Many of use use this method without any deprivation in image quality.
So many photographers are convinced they have to put any telephoto on a tripod to get sharp images and it JUST AIN'T SO.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
PS. Enjoy your lens and get out there and shoot.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.