DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Rad, Sounds like a winner!!

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

So, you are using the full frame at crop frame size with 420 real mm ! ?

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

No it doesn't "become a 350mm". It's still a 200mm.

Even though a 200mm "acts like 350mm" when it's used on a DX camera, the focal length remains the same. For comparisons sake, it's meaningless to use the 1.5X multiplier unless you are switching from FX to DX or using the lens on both FX and DX cameras.

Don't over-complicate it, choosing a longer telephoto for use on your D7100. If you buy one of the 150-600mm lenses, at it's maximum zoom you'll have 3X more reach you have with that 70-200 (or roughly 2X the 70-200 + 1.4X TC). If you instead buy a 400mm, it will give you 2X the reach. Or a zoom that goes to 500mm offers 2.5X the reach of your 70-200mm at it's maximum.

Actual magnification any of those lenses can produce is effected by the lens' closest focusing capabilities, which varies from model to model. So be sure to check that. Note: Any lens can be made to focus closer and give higher magnification by adding a macro extension tube, though that will make the lens unable to focus to infinity while the tube is installed... and the longer the focal length of the lens, the more extension that's needed to significantly effect the close focusing distance. In contrast, although a teleconverter changes focus length and magnification, it does so without changing closest focusing distance.

Most important it is image quality. Compare that instead. Look for tests done with each of the zooms you're considering, and compare them with your particular 70-200 with and without a specific 1.4X. Sure, adding that teleconverter increases focal length... but are the images usable? It's the same question with the big tele-zooms. Sure, it might offer 500mm or 600mm, but are images at those focal lengths fully usable?

I'm not all that familiar with the big zooms you mention, but everything I've seen suggests the Nikkor 200-500mm is about the best of the bunch in terms of image quality. Confirm that for yourself with online reviews and tests (not sure if they've tested it at The-Digital-Picture.com yet, but I like their sample images which can be compared side-by-side with other lenses).

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Yes, you can...


That's a test shot made with Canon EF 500/4L IS with both EF 2X II and EF 1.4X II teleconverters... effective 1400mm focal length!

HOWEVER, although it looks okay at small internet sizes and low resolutions, that image really isn't enlargeable beyond about a 5x7" print.

AND, even with Image Stabilization, a rock solid tripod and very careful technique was necessary.

AND, it was an exceptionally clear day after a recent rain.... Otherwise shooting at such a long distance, through so much atmosphere, there would be a lot of loss of image quality.

HallowedHill Loc: Chattanooga, TN

I am also trying to make up my mind about these lens. Thought you might find this link interesting:

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-200-500mm-f5-6e-vr

Be sure and read the conclusion.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Edit the s out of https: :thumbup:

jrb1213 Loc: McDonough GEorgia

"Tradition" would say stick with Nikon. "If I were a Rich Man" I would do just that because Nikon lenses and Nikon cameras are a "Matchmakers" dream. So if you are looking for a "Miracle of Miracles" perfect lens/price combination you wont't find it easily, though the Sigma and Tamron come close. All the lenses you mention will shoot both "Sunrise-Sunset" and everything in between. I doubt as a photographer you will ever be able to say "Now I Have Everything" I need. Could not resist all the "Fiddler on the Roof" references (I saw it on Broadway).

Raddad Loc: Lake Oswego, Oregon

Yes. Then setting the image area to 1.5x (24x16) we are at about 600mm. I would guess this guy was at about 50 yards.

(Download)

joraangm Loc: Baton Rouge, LA

I have a Tamron 150-600 and have used a TC with it and it works fine.

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

Dave is correct, it will not work with the Nikon. I was just considering it myself and researched it.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Man! A lot of water has passed beneath the bridge since yesterday,but I couldn't get one by you! :lol: :lol:

btbg

As you can see there are a wide range of beliefs as to which lens is the best choice.

Only you can answer that question. I chose the sigma 150-600 for it's weather sealing and its reach. If you don't like to carry the weight then it's not for you.

I recently saw a side by side comparison of that lens and the Nikon 200-500. the reviewer said that the Sigma was slightly sharper, and the Nikon focused slightly quicker. Gave the edge to the Sigma, but said that he would probably use the Nikon more because it was lighter and he could hand hold it.

In spite of the fact that many people swear by it the one lens that I wouldn't consider is the Tamaron. Might be a great lens, but every Tamaron that I have ever owned has broken more quickly than the equivalent Nikon and Sigma lenses. If you are tough on equipment they don't seem to hold up well.

If you are gentle on equipment, or only use it occasionally, then by all means choose the Tamaron.

All are good lenses that will take fine photos. If I were you I would go to a photo shop that has all of them in stock and put each of them on your camera to see how they feel in your hands. You won't be able to compare shots with each, but there are already reviews available that can do that for you. At least you will know how much each weighs and how they balance when you hold them up to shoot.

Personal preference makes a huge difference. Some can hand hold the Sigma and some can't because of the weight. Some swear by the Nikon 80-400, others like me just don't like the feel of that lens or its specs.

Whichever one you choose, learn to utilize it's strengths and enjoy the results.

P.S. I had a sigma 150-500 for years. It can take sharp photos. It depends on how well you tune it to your camera and how carefully you select the focus point. It needs good contrast to focus sharply, otherwise the focus will be sharp, but if you know that going in usually you can find a place to focus it that will give adequately sharp photos.

Raleigh Loc: Reside in Olympia WA

You are right on both FX and DX cameras.

Don't over-complicate it, choosing a longer telephoto for use on your D7100. If you buy one of the 150-600mm lenses, at it's maximum zoom you'll have 3X more reach on all counts, Thanks
you have with that 70-200 (or roughly 2X the 70-200 + 1.4X TC). If you instead buy a 400mm, it will give you 2X the reach. Or a zoom that goes to 500mm offers 2.5X the reach of your 70-200mm at it's maximum.

Actual magnification any of those lenses can produce is effected by the lens' closest focusing capabilities, which varies from model to model. So be sure to check that. Note: Any lens can be made to focus closer and give higher magnification by adding a macro extension tube, though that will make the lens unable to focus to infinity while the tube is installed... and the longer the focal length of the lens, the more extension that's needed to significantly effect the close focusing distance. In contrast, although a teleconverter changes focus length and magnification, it does so without changing closest focusing distance.

Most important it is image quality. Compare that instead. Look for tests done with each of the zooms you're considering, and compare them with your particular 70-200 with and without a specific 1.4X. Sure, adding that teleconverter increases focal length... but are the images usable? It's the same question with the big tele-zooms. Sure, it might offer 500mm or 600mm, but are images at those focal lengths fully usable?

I'm not all that familiar with the big zooms you mention, but everything I've seen suggests the Nikkor 200-500mm is about the best of the bunch in terms of image quality. Confirm that for yourself with online reviews and tests (not sure if they've tested it at The-Digital-Picture.com yet, but I like their sample images which can be compared side-by-side with other lenses).[/quote]

Raleigh Loc: Reside in Olympia WA

Wow... impresive and fun. Thanks.

Raleigh Loc: Reside in Olympia WA

Thanks I will do that.