Prime telephoto vs long zoom
Oct 15, 2019 17:12:10 #
My interest has been peaked over the Tamron 150-600 G2 lens that has been talked about. I currently have a Nikkor 400mm F3.5 AIS along with the matched teleconverter. It has a lot of history with me and I would hate to give it up. Nikon of Japan rebuilt it in 2000 with all new glass and it has been the sharpest lens I own. But I am getting older now and 7 pounds is a lot to carry around.
I was hoping to get some of your marvelous opinions about whether I should sell the 400 and go for the G2. Maybe I should mention that I shoot with a D7100. I look forward to your comments. Thanks
I was hoping to get some of your marvelous opinions about whether I should sell the 400 and go for the G2. Maybe I should mention that I shoot with a D7100. I look forward to your comments. Thanks
Oct 15, 2019 17:15:42 #
You've asked about the quality of the images, but you discussed the weight of the lens. Have you checked the weights from the online specifications? You might make your most informed decision by renting a copy of the Tamron (or any candidate) for along weekend or week-long of shooting.
Oct 15, 2019 17:22:52 #
Rocky Beech wrote:
My interest has been peaked over the Tamron 150-60... (show quote)
Excellent advice.
Oct 15, 2019 17:30:31 #
Rocky Beech wrote:
My interest has been peaked over the Tamron 150-60... (show quote)
In the interest of weight, I would be looking at the 500 5.6 PF or the Tamron 100-400 or, even the older Tamron 200-500 SP.
.
Oct 15, 2019 17:31:45 #
Rocky Beech wrote:
My interest has been peaked over the Tamron 150-60... (show quote)
It is my understanding that the New Nikon 500/5.6 PF is an excellent performer and light weight, it is not inexpensive costing as much as 3X one of the 150-600 zoom lenses but, like your older 400mm lens it offers image quality that the zooms just can't match.
Oct 15, 2019 17:52:26 #
Rocky Beech wrote:
My interest has been peaked over the Tamron 150-60... (show quote)
Stay with what you have. The 400mm 3.5 AIS is a superb lens. So you crop a little more.
Oct 15, 2019 19:41:04 #
I have a Nikkor 200 - 500. It does a nice job. My 400mm F/2.8 does a great job.
If 3.2 pounds sound better I'd get on the waiting list for a Nikkor 500mm F/5.6 PF
Steve Perry reviews it here.
https://backcountrygallery.com/nikon-500-pf-review/
If you are not familiar with Steve, a member here, check out his site:
:https://backcountrygallery.com/
--
If 3.2 pounds sound better I'd get on the waiting list for a Nikkor 500mm F/5.6 PF
Steve Perry reviews it here.
https://backcountrygallery.com/nikon-500-pf-review/
If you are not familiar with Steve, a member here, check out his site:
:https://backcountrygallery.com/
--
Oct 15, 2019 20:56:37 #
Strodav
Loc: Houston, Tx
You didn't mention what you intend to shoot with the longer lens. I'm assuming wildlife / birding. I have struggled with this topic over the last couple of years. I started out with the Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 G2 on a D7200, went to a used D500 with the G2 then picked up a Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6. In search of the best IQ possible, I recently bought a used Nikon 600mm f/4G, which is over 11 lbs without the body.
I've gotten some good results with the G2, but my recommendation is to go with the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 if you want a zoom. The difference in price is around $200 new. The G2 performs reasonably well, but does not focus as fast as the Nikon and the G2 tends to hunt when the Nikon just plain locks on and my G2 REQUIRED tuning to get the best IQ possible with the lens. While both the Nikon and G2 are both sharp in the center, the Nikon is sharper in the corners even on a DX body. I know the Tamron says 150-600mm, but it's not quite 600mm, more like 550mm.
In any case, look at buying used. I am high on KEH.com, which is where I got the used 600mm.
I've gotten some good results with the G2, but my recommendation is to go with the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 if you want a zoom. The difference in price is around $200 new. The G2 performs reasonably well, but does not focus as fast as the Nikon and the G2 tends to hunt when the Nikon just plain locks on and my G2 REQUIRED tuning to get the best IQ possible with the lens. While both the Nikon and G2 are both sharp in the center, the Nikon is sharper in the corners even on a DX body. I know the Tamron says 150-600mm, but it's not quite 600mm, more like 550mm.
In any case, look at buying used. I am high on KEH.com, which is where I got the used 600mm.
Oct 16, 2019 06:15:18 #
Look as many have said what's your priority, weight or image quality? If IQ get a prime and you can even shed some pounds since primes are usually lighter when it comes to telephotos.
If weight, ditch Nikon, get an Olympus OMD-E1 Mark II and the 300 f4 with a 2x tele if you need a lot of reach. Your arms will thank you :-)
If weight, ditch Nikon, get an Olympus OMD-E1 Mark II and the 300 f4 with a 2x tele if you need a lot of reach. Your arms will thank you :-)
Oct 16, 2019 08:43:27 #
sergiohm wrote:
Look as many have said what's your priority, weight or image quality? If IQ get a prime and you can even shed some pounds since primes are usually lighter when it comes to telephotos.
If weight, ditch Nikon, get an Olympus OMD-E1 Mark II and the 300 f4 with a 2x tele if you need a lot of reach. Your arms will thank you :-)
If weight, ditch Nikon, get an Olympus OMD-E1 Mark II and the 300 f4 with a 2x tele if you need a lot of reach. Your arms will thank you :-)
The Nikon 300/F4 PF might even be a better choice although I can't recommend a 2x tele for either. The Olympus might be nice, but not nice enough to trade your Nikon for it. Best of luck.
Oct 16, 2019 08:46:06 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Rocky Beech wrote:
My interest has been peaked over the Tamron 150-60... (show quote)
There was a time when Primes ruled because they were MUCH sharper than zooms. Those days are long gone. Yes, with primes you can shoot wide open and get great results. But I have found that my Nikon 200-500 was just as sharp at F5.6 as my 200-400 f4 and 300 2.8. So I sold those heavy buggers and now go with just the 200-500 5.6 lens. It has an electronic diaphragm which assures correct exposures using a high frames per second. I am 70 and understand the weight issue. I have no issues hand holding the 200-500 and it is sharp, sharp, sharp.
Best of luck to you and keep on shooting until the end.
Oct 16, 2019 08:50:16 #
jackpinoh
Loc: Kettering, OH 45419
Rocky Beech wrote:
My interest has been peaked over the Tamron 150-60... (show quote)
I doubt that you will achieve much in weight savings by changing lenses (maybe ½ lb). You have two options: 1) exercise with weights to improve your strength and keep your current lens, or 2) transition to Micro 4/3 (saving 2-4 lb).
Oct 16, 2019 09:04:30 #
It looks like the Tamron is about two pounds lighter than the 400mm Nikon, and it offers 200mm more reach. Selling your 400mm should easily cover the cost. Of course, renting the Tamron first would let you know what it's like to carry and use it.
Oct 16, 2019 09:09:13 #
fetzler
Loc: North West PA
I weight is a concern then I would consider m4/3. Panasonic has 100-300mm, 100-400mm lenses and Olympus has a 300mm prime lens. There are a few more as well.
Why not rent a Nikon 200-500mm and Tamron 150-600 and see what you would like better?
Why not rent a Nikon 200-500mm and Tamron 150-600 and see what you would like better?
Oct 16, 2019 09:15:25 #
I'd try to work around the weight..... different carry methods ... gimbals ...
You aren't going to get anything else that will be sharper optically than what you have right now.
My Tok 300 2.8 is a whopping 8 lbs. on its own, but the dang thing is like a razor when it comes to sharpness, plus stellar bokeh ... so I put up with the 8 lbs.
I center it on my back if I am doing a trek.... and use a 100-300 or a 90mm macro for the walk itself to the blind. Swap out when I get there. After that, it is me, my Tok, a gimbal, and a stump.
You aren't going to get anything else that will be sharper optically than what you have right now.
My Tok 300 2.8 is a whopping 8 lbs. on its own, but the dang thing is like a razor when it comes to sharpness, plus stellar bokeh ... so I put up with the 8 lbs.
I center it on my back if I am doing a trek.... and use a 100-300 or a 90mm macro for the walk itself to the blind. Swap out when I get there. After that, it is me, my Tok, a gimbal, and a stump.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.