Tamron 150-600 vs Nikon 200-500mm (Page 2): :sm24: :sm24:...

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Nicholas J DeSciose wrote:

The Nikon is a considerably better lens optically. Also the auto focus is considerably faster

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

grandpaw wrote:

I have a Tamron 150-600G1 version and they have the Nikon 200-500mm on Black Friday sale and I am tempted to purchase the Nikon. How much difference would the quality of my images be by moving to the Nikon? Is it worth the upgrade?

I shoot with a D850 and have the 200-500. never shot the Tamron. I can support what others have said about the quality of the 200-500 for the price it is a superb lens. When I bought it I thought it would have cost much more.

It is a beast. Not for the faint of heart if you are going to lug it around hiking. A tripod with a gimbal is helpful.

I can tell you that I captured my best full moon shot HAND HOLDING this camera and leaning against my house. When I reviewed the photos I was shocked. I also captured some great eagle photos in Alaska with it on my former D810.

I don't think you would go wrong buying it.

vineyardman Loc: Florida

It’s like owning a Ford vs a Chevy.
If you own a Nikon, anything Nikon is better then anything else. If you only have Tamron, or Canon or whatever, Yep,you guessed it….
Same as Ford vs Chevy—-
Go with what you can spend and be happy!!

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

vineyardman wrote:

It’s like owning a Ford vs a Chevy.
If you own a Nikon, anything Nikon is better then anything else. If you only have Tamron, or Canon or whatever, Yep,you guessed it….
Same as Ford vs Chevy—-
Go with what you can spend and be happy!!

"anything Nikon is better then anything else" yet another honest quote from a happy owner of Nikon equipment.

Mustang1

Please don't yield to speculation from others. Those who have experience with your lense are the ones for whom to listen. However, I have owned Tamron lenses before and I have no complaints about this brand of lenses.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

billnikon wrote:

I just got another 200-500 after selling my first ... (show quote)

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Mustang1 wrote:

Please don't yield to speculation from others. Those who have experience with your lense are the ones for whom to listen. However, I have owned Tamron lenses before and I have no complaints about this brand of lenses.

I have no complaints with Tamron either. Except with long zooms. In that category there is no comparison!

James May

I have the Tamron 150=600 mm G2 and the Nikon 200- 500 . The Nikon one is much sharper and better color.
I took the Nikon one to Africa and got great photos.

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

grandpaw wrote:

I have a Tamron 150-600G1 version and they have the Nikon 200-500mm on Black Friday sale and I am tempted to purchase the Nikon. How much difference would the quality of my images be by moving to the Nikon? Is it worth the upgrade?

I have the G2 version of the Tamron - pros: lighter and less bulk than the Nikon, weather sealing, fluorine coating, zoom lock, nicer hood, +100mm on the long end. cons: IQ not quite as good as the Nikon (sharpness on the long end), AF performance a bit lagging (but may be improved with firmware updates - Tap in Console). I am considering selling it and then getting the Nikon or putting it towards a Z lens/system. Make no mistakes I've gotten some nice images from this lens. The G2 version is an improvement over the G1 version.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

James May wrote:

I have the Tamron 150=600 mm G2 and the Nikon 200- 500 . The Nikon one is much sharper and better color.
I took the Nikon one to Africa and got great photos.

Only works in Africa?

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

grandpaw wrote:

I have a Tamron 150-600G1 version and they have the Nikon 200-500mm on Black Friday sale and I am tempted to purchase the Nikon. How much difference would the quality of my images be by moving to the Nikon? Is it worth the upgrade?

Most definitely better than the G1. I have the G1, the Sigma 150-600, and the Nikon. The Nikon is better than the G1 and slightly better than the Sigma which compares favorably with the G2. If you had the G2 or the Sigma I couldn't recommend the upgrade to the Nikon unless you got a good deal, but I would upgrade from the G1.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

grandpaw wrote:

I have a Tamron 150-600G1 version and they have the Nikon 200-500mm on Black Friday sale and I am tempted to purchase the Nikon. How much difference would the quality of my images be by moving to the Nikon? Is it worth the upgrade?

Lots and YES - if you are a serious shooter and need good AF.
.

coolhanduke Loc: Redondo Beach, CA

I bought the Tamron at a trade show. Did numerous test shots.
Tested the Nikon 200-500mm through the NPS program.
Sent the Tamron back and purchased the Nikon.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

I owned a Sigma 150-500 and upgraded to the Nikoikn 200-500 and couldn't believe the improvement. Definitely the Nikon is the choice for excellent results.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

IMHO, there isn't a Tamron lens made as good as an equivalent Nikon. There are differences in price and weight for good reasons. I do own, and like very much, several Sigma ART lenses, but have long sold any Tamron I have ever owned. Best of luck.