Lens question (Page 2): Thanks for you reply...

starlifter Loc: Towson, MD

Gene51 wrote:

After using (for a week back in 2016) a borrowed C... (show quote)

Thanks for you reply

ClarkJohnson Loc: Fort Myers, FL and Cohasset, MA

starlifter wrote:

Money is not the issue (Nikon not with standing,) I prefer Tamron .

If money is not the issue, take the next step and get the Nikon 500mm f5.6 PF. IQ is way better than the Nikon/Tamron/Sigma zooms IMHO, and the lightweight makes it a joy to carry and use. My usual wildlife pairing is with a D500, but I get glorious images with the high megapixel Z7II as well.

starlifter Loc: Towson, MD

ClarkJohnson wrote:

If money is not the issue, take the next step and get the Nikon 500mm f5.6 PF. IQ is way better than the Nikon/Tamron/Sigma zooms IMHO, and the lightweight makes it a joy to carry and use. My usual wildlife pairing is with a D500, but I get glorious images with the high megapixel Z7II as well.

Thank you for your advice. I have 4 other Tammys 3 of which are the G2 versions and love the IQ and build. I also like to be able to zoom and the extra 100mm. When I said money wasn't an issue I meant to say I had the 11 or12 hundred as an equipment trade of the 14 hundred dollar price. Thanks again for your response. I'll be shooting with a D850.

starlifter Loc: Towson, MD

imagemeister wrote:

Not sure what you would hope to gain .....Optically they are so close as to be of no practical consequence - with sample variation being the largest separator - This is according to the objective Imatest scores I see. They are the same size and weight and the same cost ......and are both focus tuneable. You may see a tiny difference in AF depending on the exact body you are using .
.

Thanks again. You said the Tammy and The sigma were same price. The Tammy is about $400 more than the sigma.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

starlifter wrote:

I'm almost tired of the reviews and thought I'd get boots on the ground opinions. I have been contemplating Trading in my 5 year old Sigma 150-600 C for a Tamron 150-600 G2. I already have 4 other Tamrons and love the IQ and build quality. I value other hoggers opinions and want to make a good choice. Thanks in advance for your advice.

If you've read all the reviews and comparisons, there's your answer. Unless a "hogger" has used both lenses extensively and made exhaustive comparisons, the online reviewers are your best bet.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Sigma+150-600+C+vs+tamron+150-600+g2&oq=Sigma+150-600+C+vs+tamron+150-600+g2&aqs=edge..69i57.7152j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

agillot

At the time when the G2 came out , it was said that the original non G2 was soft passed 550mm , the G2 fixed that .

jsimp3 Loc: Tennessee

All good responses. I shoot with the Sigma Sport version of the 150-600 mounted on the D850 which is quite heavy handholding. I suggest weighing the benefits with the cost when making your decision.

starlifter Loc: Towson, MD

jsimp3 wrote:

All good responses. I shoot with the Sigma Sport version of the 150-600 mounted on the D850 which is quite heavy handholding. I suggest weighing the benefits with the cost when making your decision.

Thank you.

Sidwalkastronomy Loc: New Jersey Shore

agillot wrote:

At the time when the G2 came out , it was said that the original non G2 was soft passed 550mm , the G2 fixed that .

I spoke to Tamron and even they said to back off slightly from the 600 to improve image.
What other stuff you trading to get that much to cover the cost.

starlifter Loc: Towson, MD

Sidwalkastronomy wrote:

I spoke to Tamron and even they said to back off slightly from the 600 to improve image.
What other stuff you trading to get that much to cover the cost.

A nikondD810, a Tamron 45mm prime and of course the Sigma with dock and case.

Sidwalkastronomy Loc: New Jersey Shore

I looked at the three lenses, 2 Sigma and the G2. The sport was so heavy and more expensive but the G2 seemed better in all reviews. I have a few Tamron lenses and happy with them

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

imagemeister wrote:

Do you go out in bad weather ?? Is there anything you think is wrong with the Sigma ??
.

I don't know anything about the Sigma; My go-to brand is Olympus. They too are weather resistant.
And yes, I sometimes do go out in bad weather: rain with wind, or snow with wind, or just plain cold.
It's never been a problem for the camera, although it has been for me! Raindrops or snowflakes on my glasses don't improve my vision much.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

agillot wrote:

At the time when the G2 came out , it was said that the original non G2 was soft passed 550mm , the G2 fixed that .

I have the G2 and have tried to shoot it at 600/6.3 - with disappointment ( on a 24 MP full frame). Shooting @500 and @f8 if I can manage it is better. But, I will say I have been spoiled by Canon prime lenses......
.

starlifter Loc: Towson, MD

Morning Star wrote:

I don't know anything about the Sigma; My go-to brand is Olympus. They too are weather resistant.
And yes, I sometimes do go out in bad weather: rain with wind, or snow with wind, or just plain cold.
It's never been a problem for the camera, although it has been for me! Raindrops or snowflakes on my glasses don't improve my vision much.

Thanks for your reply.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

I've had two of the Tamron super zooms and had problems with sharp focus at the long end with both of them. I won't have another. Nothing against Tamron, I have a couple others that I like. But NOT super zooms. I have the 200~500 Nikon zoom, two, in fact! and am very happy with them.