columbine1111

Hello. I did a lot of research (including reading posts here) before deciding on buying the Nikon D500 (just received-still in box), since I want to concentrate on birds and wildlife. (I am also interested in landscapes, macro, family, and there will be newborn grandchildren this year! I also purchased the Nikkor 16-80mm and 70-300). To get back on track, what is your opinion comparing the Tamron SP 150-600mm G2 and Nikon 200-500?

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Welcome to UHH. I bought the Nikon D200-500 for birds and wildlife. I did not consider the Tamron. Prior to the 200-500 I had the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens.
The Nikon D200-500 mated with your D500 will be a winning combination for birds and wildlife.

Haydon

Your best to check the reviews instead of asking. Generally speaking, people are going to patronize their purchases and not own both lenses. Your preferences may also differ from the masses.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

For my intended use with BIF, so far I prefer the 200-500 due to its quicker focus. Lower light and the G2 do not go well together. My limited use has been with a D500 and D850.

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

Hope this adds flavor to the discussion: I previously owned both the Nikon 24-70, Nikon 70-200 and now own Tamrons 24-70 and 70-200, both are G2's. The Tamrons are faster focus, sharper and I'm very pleased that I purchased the Tamrons.

Dan R Loc: Way Way Way Upstate NY

Either way, its a pretty good sized purchase. Maybe renting one or both ahead of time would be worth it.

mleuck

Nikon 200-500 without question.

DennisC. Loc: Antelope, CA

I owned both lens for several months and used them with the D500 and D810. When mounted on a tripod the image quality was basically identical. The Tamron seemed to focus slightly faster, there are several reviews on YouTube that will show that. I liked the ability to lock the focus at any focal length on the Tamron and it was also eaiser to carry on long walks. The stabilizers are excellent on both lenses, the Tamron's locks the image in the viewfinder a hair quicker. I was able to get sharp images on static subjects consistently all the way down to 1/8 of a second with both lenses. When hand holding I seemed to have a higher keeper rate on birds in flight with the Nikon, plus I like the constant f5.6 aperture. The 100mm difference in focal length did not seem to make any difference, it's only a slight crop to get the same image size. The Tamron comes with an Arca Swiss plate built in, I picked up a different tripod collar for the Nikon with an Arca Swiss plate built in, that way it's quick to mount on my ball head or gimble head tripods. I ended up selling the Tamron on Ebay and got most of my money back. I now use the Nikon with the D850 and it is an excellent combination. Either lens is an excellent choice.

rayr

A friend of mine has a D500 and I use a D750. he has the nikon 200-500 and I use the Tamron 150-600 G2. Shooting birds one day, we traded lenses and as others have said here, he thought the Tamron focused faster on his D500.

Jim Bob

I agree 100%. Precisely my experience. After all the positive reviews about the G2 I was expecting better performance. I find that it lacks focus consistency and dependable repeatability. I have tried it on multiple bodies and each time came away with the same conclusion. Between those 2 lenses, in my experience, there is only one real choice, the 200-500. I am very disappointed with Tamron on the 150-600 G2, especially after my excellent experience with the 15-30 and the 24-70 G2, both stellar performers at a fraction of the costs of the Nikon counterparts.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

A lot of my shooting is earlier in the day and the G2 obviously hunts. Kind of easy to compare when you have both lenses in your hand. Image quality is comparable.

Jim Bob

Agreed. Use G2 only in good light. Otherwise its a dice roll.

Jim Bob

Good point. We can only share our experiences. But if we do so honestly, that's information worth some consideration in my book. The problem is precisely as you pointed out. Folks are reluctant to say something they own sucks. Fortunately in this area I'm like Spock, who told Kirk in Star Trek II, I have no ego to bruise.

Jim Bob

There is no way the Tamron 70-200 G2 is sharper than the newest Nikon 70-200. It represents a much better value and in a few instances tracks a tad bit better. But sharper throughout its range? I don't think so. Check your facts.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

https://photographylife.com/nikon-200-500mm-vs-tamron-150-600mm-vs-sigma-150-600mm-c/1

Also -

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