BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Bill gomberg

For best image quality ; a prime and zoom with your feet . The ultimate being Zeiss if you can afford it .

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Drinking on a Sunday morning.... :lol: :lol:

Photosmoke

Hello Bob another Marylander :lol: :lol: :lol:

jsmangis Loc: Peoria, IL

I have used both lenses (sort of) on my D610. I rented the Nikkor 80-400 for the Indy 500 in May and used a Tamron 150-600 (I know, not the Sigma) at a local park during their Tailgate Party yesterday. The quality of the Nikkor is superior and it seems to work better in lower light but is MUCH heavier. The Tamron is longer, but interestingly, a bit easier to handhold. The D version of the Nikkor is a bit lighter and more compact than the newer G version (which I gave also rented). IMHO, I would recommend the Nikkor but you will need at least a monopod.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Yes, I'm a mono and tripod fan!

OldEarl Loc: Northeast Kansas

Go down to the local camera store and hold each lens. How does it feel to you? Look through it. How does it look through the finder? Everyone can tell you how the lenses work for them (and fit with their life view) but you are the one who will live with the decision.

If you do not have a local camera store, see if some friends have either or both so you have some idea of what you are buying.

Gifted One Loc: S. E. Idaho

I am a Canon guy. I have a friend that shoots Nikon. he had the Sig 150-500 that was stolen. He replaced it with the Nikon 80-400. he has loved it and has recommended it to many others. I have seen many that are using the Tamron and Sigma 150-500/600 and love them & other that don't. Interesting!

J. R.

checkingout_it_out

Rockwell recommends the Tamron 150-600mm as a great deal and good optics! ???

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Although I do not own, and have not tried, either lens you are questioning, I do have some thoughts from what I do own and what others that I trust have told me. I would guess the first thing we need to know is what you budget is as that will change our recommendations. That being said...

It is my understanding that the new Nikon 80-400G is fabulous compared to the older version which I have been advised, on many occasions, to stay away from. That does not mean it won't work for you as it would be a good pick price-wise. I do own the Sigma 150-600 Sport and I like it quite a bit. It's up there, at $2,000 but nowhere near as expensive, or heavy as my Nikon 400/2.8, the newest version of which is a cool $ 12,000! The Tamron version and the Sigma C lens are half the cost of the Sport model, each about $ 1,100 with a soon-to-expire rebate on the Tamron putting it at $ 1,000. I have shot with the Tamron lens, and I do prefer the Sigma Sport, but again there's that price jump. With all these new lenses the shorter Sigma is a good deal, both new and used, as well. Finally, when the new Nikon 200-500/5.6 is released at $1,400 it may also be a gamechanger. Lots to consider, but price is important and you shouldn't feel you need to spend thousands when you want to spend hundreds. You can always trade up. Best of luck.

wingate2417 Loc: Quincy, Ca.

There is nothing better than a prime lens. They will always be sharper than any zoom lens

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Yeah, just trot down and grab a 400mm Nikon prime. No need to discuss this anymore, it's solved. :roll: :roll: Why didn't I think of that?

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

The new 500 and 600 are pretty nice too. A couple of extra bodies and no lens switching needed! :lol: :lol: :lol:

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

I'm Catonsville - how 'bout you?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I may have missed that........maybe he is changing quicker than I thought ??