Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Zoom lens
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 next>>
Feb 13, 2020 13:10:44   #
Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada
 
vpeek1947 wrote:
I shoot Nikon (D750) - Sports & wildlife - been looking for couple of months at Nikon 200-500 or Sigma 150-600 both Sports & contemporary version. Have held all three and still cannot pull the trigger. Hopefully UHH can provide real world advise.


I shoot with the Nikon 200-500 5.6 vr and love it for my sports photography. Great when sunny days are with us. Focus is quite fast for a 5.6 lens. I recommend this lens.
Here are some shots to help you decide.
Good luck.


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 13:14:39   #
vpeek1947 Loc: Louisville, Ky
 
Thanks for all the input.
I did not look at the Tamron - will do.
Thanks to all that provided input.

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 13:21:30   #
Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada
 
vpeek1947 wrote:
Thanks for all the input.
I did not look at the Tamron - will do.
Thanks to all that provided input.


Glad we could help

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 13:45:13   #
billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
 
vpeek1947 wrote:
I shoot Nikon (D750) - Sports & wildlife - been looking for couple of months at Nikon 200-500 or Sigma 150-600 both Sports & contemporary version. Have held all three and still cannot pull the trigger. Hopefully UHH can provide real world advise.


You will get many OPINIONS on this site concerning your question. I have owned the Nikon 200-500 since it was introduced. After a few months I sold my Nikon 300 2.8 and 200-400 4 because the Nikon 200-500 delivered extremely good results.
I have never looked back. I also shoot with the Nikon 500 mm 5.6 PF and the new Sony 200-600 on the Sony a9. I am happy to report that my Nikon 200-500 still compares favorably with this new gear. I will still mount the lens for some wildlife situations.
Below are a few examples of it's sharpness. I can also say for the first three years I owned the 200-500 I shot it every day and it still looks as nice as when I bought it years ago. It has retained it's value very well, something that 3rd party glass cannot do.







| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 13:56:33   #
Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada
 
billnikon wrote:
You will get many OPINIONS on this site concerning your question. I have owned the Nikon 200-500 since it was introduced. After a few months I sold my Nikon 300 2.8 and 200-400 4 because the Nikon 200-500 delivered extremely good results.
I have never looked back. I also shoot with the Nikon 500 mm 5.6 PF and the new Sony 200-600 on the Sony a9. I am happy to report that my Nikon 200-500 still compares favorably with this new gear. I will still mount the lens for some wildlife situations.
Below are a few examples of it's sharpness. I can also say for the first three years I owned the 200-500 I shot it every day and it still looks as nice as when I bought it years ago. It has retained it's value very well, something that 3rd party glass cannot do.
You will get many OPINIONS on this site concerning... (show quote)


Good stuff Bill. I have no complaints on mine either.

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 15:31:28   #
Reconvic Loc: clermont Fl
 
vpeek1947 wrote:
I shoot Nikon (D750) - Sports & wildlife - been looking for couple of months at Nikon 200-500 or Sigma 150-600 both Sports & contemporary version. Have held all three and still cannot pull the trigger. Hopefully UHH can provide real world advise.


This topic concerning these lenses (you omitted the Tamron 600 G2) has been discussed numerous times here. Gene51 and Saxman have summed it up well. I have photographed much with all the lenses except the Sigma Sport. My wife and I shoot thousands of bird images every week. We UPGRADED to the Tamron G2 and the quality of our images improved significantly.We use it on D850s. If you are going to take advice from anyone, look at their posts here first. We did not consider the Sigma Sport because of the extra weight and we photograph freehand most of the time. There's not a huge difference in these lenses and you just have to sift through all the egos and allegiance to a brand, and get what fits your needs.

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 15:52:27   #
Reconvic Loc: clermont Fl
 
VeraP wrote:
I have read a good number of these comparison threads on here (and every one is educational) and all of you seem to prefer the 150-600 over the 200-500. Is that because the extra reach makes such a difference to you or do you think the results are actually better? I am looking at the 200-500 for my new D500 (mostly BIF, etc) and still weighing the choices. Thanks. Vera


Yes, because of the extra reach and quick focus. If you are using it on a crop camera YOU NEED THE EXTRA REACH. This king fisher shot was taken by my wife on a D850 (that crops at 20mps just like the D500)and a Tamron 600 G2 lens. Have you ever seen any other GOOD kingfishers in flight shots on here? Both of these shots were heavily cropped and we wouldn't have gotten them without the extra reach.


(Download)
Tricolored Heron erratically fishing
Tricolored Heron erratically fishing...
(Download)

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 16:33:08   #
Reconvic Loc: clermont Fl
 
Look at the work before you leap......

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 16:40:54   #
camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.
 
Both are excellent images Thomas. If I had to make a selection I would consider if 600mm is exactly what I need otherwise I am sure I will be very happy with the 200-500 and 500mm with a cropped sensor ends up around 750mm field of view.
I have not used the Tamron-Sigma lenses nor the Nikkor so consider my opinion with a grain of salt. I like to use OEM lenses.

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 16:51:14   #
racerrich3 Loc: Los Angeles, Ca.
 
vpeek1947 wrote:
I shoot Nikon (D750) - Sports & wildlife - been looking for couple of months at Nikon 200-500 or Sigma 150-600 both Sports & contemporary version. Have held all three and still cannot pull the trigger. Hopefully UHH can provide real world advise.


my 200-500 goes great with my Nikon cameras. just my 1 cent worth.

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 19:13:14   #
MadMikeOne Loc: Southern New Jersey Shore
 
VeraP wrote:
I have read a good number of these comparison threads on here (and every one is educational) and all of you seem to prefer the 150-600 over the 200-500. Is that because the extra reach makes such a difference to you or do you think the results are actually better? I am looking at the 200-500 for my new D500 (mostly BIF, etc) and still weighing the choices. Thanks. Vera


Personally speaking I chose to purchase the Tamron 150-600 G2 over the Nikon 200-500 for my Nikon D500 for a few reasons. Please note that I made my decision AFTER shooting wildlife, birds, and BIF with a friend’s 200-500 mounted on my D500. MY reasons for choosing the Tamron G2 over the Nikon 200-500 - 1) that extra 100mm reach, 2) the Nikon felt much heavier (I shoot handheld about 50% of the time), 3) the G2 seemed to focus more quickly, 4) I was not able to discern a difference in IQ, 5) better weatherproofing on the Tamron. Cost did not enter into my decision because the costs were quite close.
Shot from a vehicle with engine running. Rhino running & a few hundred feet away. Heavily cropped.
Shot from a vehicle with engine running. Rhino run...

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 19:40:07   #
Reconvic Loc: clermont Fl
 
MadMikeOne wrote:
Personally speaking I chose to purchase the Tamron 150-600 G2 over the Nikon 200-500 for my Nikon D500 for a few reasons. Please note that I made my decision AFTER shooting wildlife, birds, and BIF with a friend’s 200-500 mounted on my D500. MY reasons for choosing the Tamron G2 over the Nikon 200-500 - 1) that extra 100mm reach, 2) the Nikon felt much heavier (I shoot handheld about 50% of the time), 3) the G2 seemed to focus more quickly, 4) I was not able to discern a difference in IQ, 5) better weatherproofing on the Tamron. Cost did not enter into my decision because the costs were quite close.
Personally speaking I chose to purchase the Tamron... (show quote)


Not because you accidentally agreed with my advice but good reasons why to go with the Tammy …..

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 19:56:50   #
MadMikeOne Loc: Southern New Jersey Shore
 
Reconvic wrote:
Not because you accidentally agreed with my advice but good reasons why to go with the Tammy …..


With all due respect, I’ve probably owned my baby longer than you’ve owned yours! Seriously though, I started with the 1st generation Tamron & “traded up” to G2 after I bought my D500. No way will I lug “big honker primes” around with me when I travel. Long zooms work for my subjects and shooting style.

| Reply
Feb 13, 2020 20:17:46   #
Reconvic Loc: clermont Fl
 
MadMikeOne wrote:
With all due respect, I’ve probably owned my baby longer than you’ve owned yours! Seriously though, I started with the 1st generation Tamron & “traded up” to G2 after I bought my D500. No way will I lug “big honker primes” around with me when I travel. Long zooms work for my subjects and shooting style.


Probably have! Sally and I have only been doing this photography thing for 2 years but we're getting better every day!! This being the only photo blog that I've belonged to I've figured out whose zooming who, protocol, pecking order, who to get advice from. Gene51, Imagemeister, LindafromMaine, and last but not least....you

| Reply
Feb 14, 2020 00:56:31   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
vpeek1947 wrote:
I shoot Nikon (D750) - Sports & wildlife - been looking for couple of months at Nikon 200-500 or Sigma 150-600 both Sports & contemporary version. Have held all three and still cannot pull the trigger. Hopefully UHH can provide real world advise.


I don't have any images on my computer anymore that I took while testing the other lenses - never thought I'd need them once I made my decision on the Sport. But I do have some images to share taken with the Sport, which has become my most used lens. All of these are hand-held. I can't say that the 600mmF4 delivered better results. But I can say that the extra reach, build quality, image quality and overall feel of the lens were the reasons for my choosing the Sigma over the Nikon, which honestly was my second choice. The Tamron, which was not available when I purchased the Sport would be my first choice, if only for the almost 2 lb lighter load. I rarely use a tripod anymore.

_DSC3800-NIKON D810-3007990-(14-05-19) by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_DSC2853-NIKON D810-3007990-(25-04-19)-Edit by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_DSC4690-NIKON D810-3007990-(26-01-18) by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_DSC3196-NIKON D810-3007990-(11-01-18) by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_DSC0953-NIKON D810-3007990-(22-09-17) by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_CVP8793-3007990-Edit by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

_DSC7201-3077096 by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2020 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.