Nikon 200-500 or tamron 150-600
Apr 4, 2016 23:34:38 #
I have read the thread from drdale55 that was posted yesterday concerning the Nikon 300f4 and the Nikon 200-500, but I have been wondering about the tamron 150-600 as compared to both of these lenses. I get that none of these lenses are Nikon 600 f4 lenses, but what is the real image quality from them compared to each other. I have a tamron 150-600 and have thought about getting the 200-500 or the 300 f4 with a TC14ell but with the thread from drDale55, I gather that the image quality of the 300 f4 is not much different than 200-500 based on that thread and it would be missing the zoom as well. What say ye?
Apr 5, 2016 00:19:02 #
I'm not sure I get the point of the 300 f4 with or without the TC. It's one stop faster than the 200-500, but you lose that advantage with the 1.4x TC.
I have the 200-500, use it for sports and it works well on a tripod. I stop it down to f/7.1 or f/8 if I've got the light; it's noticeably better.
I also have the 300 f/2.8, and use it with 1.4, 1.7 and 2.0 TCs. I get a usable 600mm f/5.6 with that setup. Faster, sharper, but of course not as flexible.
If I'm shooting a narrower range of distance, I prefer the 300 with appropriate TC and whatever cropping I need.
If I'm shooting a wide range of distance, then the 200-500 is very good. I used it at the bottom of the Halfpipe at the Burton Snowboard Championships. My only complaint is that the zoom takes a lot of turns, so it's hard running from 500 back to 200. Doesn't help that Nikon zoom controls are backwards, so you can't gain some extra leverage switching from landscape to portrait.
I have the 200-500, use it for sports and it works well on a tripod. I stop it down to f/7.1 or f/8 if I've got the light; it's noticeably better.
I also have the 300 f/2.8, and use it with 1.4, 1.7 and 2.0 TCs. I get a usable 600mm f/5.6 with that setup. Faster, sharper, but of course not as flexible.
If I'm shooting a narrower range of distance, I prefer the 300 with appropriate TC and whatever cropping I need.
If I'm shooting a wide range of distance, then the 200-500 is very good. I used it at the bottom of the Halfpipe at the Burton Snowboard Championships. My only complaint is that the zoom takes a lot of turns, so it's hard running from 500 back to 200. Doesn't help that Nikon zoom controls are backwards, so you can't gain some extra leverage switching from landscape to portrait.
Apr 5, 2016 03:53:11 #
If you already have the 150-600 and don't need a faster lens for shooting indoors then you already have all the focal lengths covered.
Apr 5, 2016 05:22:03 #
Apr 5, 2016 06:59:10 #
I have both, I'm selling the Tamron. I find the Nikon's AF is quicker and the VC seems better by at least a stop, closer to 2. I find the Tamron a bit softer over all and especially out past 450mm.
Apr 5, 2016 07:45:31 #
Apr 5, 2016 10:45:07 #
Mark7829
Loc: Calfornia
nikonkelly wrote:
I have read the thread from drdale55 that was post... (show quote)
You really need to place the specs of all lenses side by side. You need to understand ALL the criteria not just sharpness. BTW, all lenses are sharp in the middle, it is at the edges when they start of fail, add in chromatic aberration, distortion, vignetting, coatings to enhance sharpness, saturation, reduce flares, aperture blades (rounded vs squared) for bokeh, internal or external zoom, AF override and motors, VR/IS, materials, glass, elements and groups, weather sealing, metal mounts, resale value and it is not a simple decision. Although many would like it to be.
The best your going to get out of this group is. "I have it and I like it or I don't have it but like this one".
Don't become dependent on what others tell you. Become the expert and you will never have any regrets.
Apr 5, 2016 10:54:07 #
nikonkelly wrote:
I have read the thread from drdale55 that was post... (show quote)
I had the tamron 150-600 and found it to hunt for focus and it was very noisy. the photos were great, but I personally could not deal with the noise. I sold it and purchased the Nikon 200-500 and could not be happier. also, if you have any Nikon teleconverters, they will work on the 200-500, but not on the tamron.
Apr 5, 2016 12:01:07 #
We have both the Tam and the 200-500...my wife shoots the 200-500 on a d810 and I shoot the Tam on a d7100...they are both good lenses...and produce good results.
My advice would be to play with the Tam and practice with it...its a very capable lens.
If you have a full frame then go with the 200-500
My advice would be to play with the Tam and practice with it...its a very capable lens.
If you have a full frame then go with the 200-500
Apr 5, 2016 12:11:42 #
nikonkelly wrote:
I have a tamron 150-600 and have thought about getting the 200-500 or the 300 f4 with a TC14ell
What don't you like about the Tamron 150-600mm ?
Apr 5, 2016 19:53:17 #
nikonkelly wrote:
I have read the thread from drdale55 that was post... (show quote)
If you are on full frame (and it appears you are), my opinion is the 200-500 will be better for you - period - unless you have a very special need for 300mm and f4. Also, cropping with pixel enlargement is your friend.
Apr 6, 2016 00:33:53 #
First thank you to everyone who has responded here, I greatly appreciate all of your comments. Yes, I do have the Tamron and the reason that I am not sold on it is that talking with friends who have had both of these lenses, everyone of them... yes everyone of them has indicated that the nikon 200-500 is overall a better lens... faster to auto focus, sharper, and has an overall better image appearance, and I had bought the Tamron 1.5 years ago. over the past 1.5 years it has been into the factory three times and on the second trip I sent my D800 with it to have the focus dealt with... this last time after they got the camera calibrated to it... it was still not consistent in focusing. so, I have been thinking that I would sell the replacement lens that they are sending me and possibly get the nikon 200-500. All I am really looking for is a very sharp, sturdy lens, that will give me great image quality... for a fair price... I dont have thousands to spend as I still have to eat! LOL
Apr 6, 2016 02:43:21 #
The Nikon 200-500 is most closely matched by the Sigma 150-600 "Sport". The Tamron is most closely matched by the Sigma 150-600 "Contemporary". Though many would never know/see the difference in any of them.
I was torn between the 200-500 and the Sport for a very long time. I decided that the extra features of the Sport tipped the scale just enough to go that way.
The Tamron does not truly compare with the Nikon. At least not in just about every review, and test I could find in the months of research I did.
I was torn between the 200-500 and the Sport for a very long time. I decided that the extra features of the Sport tipped the scale just enough to go that way.
The Tamron does not truly compare with the Nikon. At least not in just about every review, and test I could find in the months of research I did.
Apr 6, 2016 10:17:08 #
Thanks Bill, tghat is what I have found as well... the problem was that when I was looking in the past there were no other lenses to compare with... now, a year and a half later there are others. thanks
Kelly
Kelly
Apr 6, 2016 20:18:01 #
nikonkelly wrote:
over the past 1.5 years it has been into the factory three times and on the second trip I sent my D800 with it to have the focus dealt with... this last time after they got the camera calibrated to it.
I sent mine in after about 6 months of use due to the focus dragging and hunting. Their service was fantastic! Fixed the problem and I had it back 7 days after sending it in. It is a good lens, just liked the Nikon a bit better and the Nikon will likely hold it's $$$ value longer.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.