Erp1938

I have a Nikon D5600, went to the camera store and tried out the Tamron 150-600mm lens, It was great they did not have the Nikkor 200-500mm to try or the Sigma 150-600 back ordered. My problem is the weight for a short 4'11, 66yr old women. Is there a zoom lens combination I could get with sharpness & length similar to the super zooms without the weight, or am I out of luck?

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

G0 with Nikon 200-500

Bill_de Loc: US

If you can get by without the zoom, the Nikkor 300mm f/4 pf or 500mm f/5.6 pf are much easier to handle than the zooms.

The 300 mm works well with the 1.4 teleconverter.

The Nikon 200 - 500 zoom is a very nice lens when it resides on a tripod.

Your mileage may vary.

---

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Another vote along the lines of PixelStan77. Nikon lenses.
--Bob

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Big, heavy glass goes with the large sensor size. APS-C lenses would be smaller and lighter but I don't know of any superzooms that cover the range you mention.

However, m4/3 lenses are relatively small and light, and as an example, an Olympus 100-400mm zoom gives the full frame equivalent reach of 800mm. They aren't cheap and it would mean buying an m4/3 camera, but the setup would be relatively small and light, and that would apply to any other m4/3 lenses that you bought for it.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Try the Tamron or Sigma 100-400, smaller, lighter etc.
Not as good as the Canon 100-400L mk2 but you have a Nikon.

The Tamron seems to be sharper 100-300 in the center while the Sigma has better corner sharpness. At 400 the Tamron is sharper wide open and the Sigma at f/8. I would ignore the corner sharpness part since your D5600 will be seeing the center of these two FF lenses.

Look here for a long detailed comparison: https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamron-100-400mm-f4-5-6-3

A couple of wildlife reviews said that even when cropped to the same angle of view as the 150-600's the 100-400's image quality holds up well in comparison.

You might consider a good monopod* or light weight tripod to help and one of the backpack style harnesses to distribute the weight of the camera and lenses for carrying. Use a quick release plate to put the rig on and off the mono/tripod.

With my Canon bodies I use the Tamron 150-600 G2, Canon 100-400L mk2 and Canon 70-300L. I also have the 1.4x extenders for all three. No AF on the G2 with the extender as it becomes an f/9 for a lot of it's zoom range.

*Also can be used as a hiking staff or even for self defense.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

I highly recommend the Nikon 200~500. Use it like a fitness weight on a regular basis and you will be able to enjoy the benefits of a very good lens.

Ruraldi Loc: Milmay, NJ

I have the Tampon 150-600 I'm 68 and have no problem using it with a monopod. My walk around lens is the Tampon 18-400 --- exceptional sharpness and light enough for hikes.

alexol

While you may be two years, or ~3%, older, the OP is 4'11" which may make a difference.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I was thinking the same thing. Not a cheap alternative, but I think it would satisfy the OP’s age and height issue.

neillaubenthal

I sold my Tamron G2 and bought a Nikon 500PF…much better optically and actually hand holdable and much easier to carry around. I’m really happy I made the switch.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I have a friend that is one inch taller than you, and 67. She totes around a Tamron 150-600 G2 on a D800 camera body and uses a Black Rapid sling strap. At first, before getting the Tamron, she used to borrow my Sigma 150-600 Sport, which is almost 2 lbs heavier.

These was taken by her with the D800 and the Sigma - hand held, when she was 65. She likes the Tamron because it is so light compared to the Sigma - both have similar image quality. She calls it her walkaround lens and body.

After testing her Tamron, it not only is as sharp as the Sigma @600mm, it is sharper at shorter focal lengths, has better optical stabilization - equal to the Nikon, better build quality than the Nikon (you needed fear a little drizzle or summer shower), and at the end of the day it is sharper than the Nikon. Not by a big margin, but if you are fussy, and using it on a high megapixel body down the road, you'll appreciate the difference.

(Download)


(Download)

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

I solved this issue by getting a used Nikon1 J1 on ebay, which has 12MP, one inch sensor and paired it with the Nikkor 55-300 DX AF-S lens and the Nikon FT1 autofocusing adapter and set the camera to center point auto focus. This is higher quality than any bridge camera with a smaller 1/2.3" sensor, and a longer equivalent focal length of 810mm of any bridge camera with a one inch sensor, and lighter than any dslr with a 600mm lens. The whole package weighs just 2 lbs, which makes it ideal for hand holding and going to where the birds are. It focuses quickly and can shoot in burst mode.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Brian in Whitby Loc: Whitby, Ontario, Canada

If the problem is holding the lens while making an exposure, try using it with a monopod. The monopod takes the weight making it easier to gold the lens steady.
If the problem is carrying the camera and lens around, try putting the camera on your shoulder use the monopod to hold the camera in place.

cedymock Loc: Irmo, South Carolina

The Nikon 200 - 500 zoom is great but heavy; I am 68 in good health and it's still heavy. The combination that Bill_de (300 mm and 1.4 teleconverter ) was discussing may be a better fit for the young lady you described.