I've found several discussions on this but none that actually address my question.

I currently have the Tamron 150-600 G1. I've used it a fair amount and it does well but the pictures always seem a little soft. I've read that the new G2 version, as well as the Nikkor 200-500, is much better. I'm trying to decide if it is worth selling my G1 and buying either the G2 or Nikkor 200-500 and if so which. I know the following about each:

Tamron 150-600 G2:
Has much faster focus than the G1 and the Nikkor
Image Quality is excellent but slightly less than the Nikkor
Larger range than the Nikkor (50 on the bottom end and 100 on the top end)

Nikkor 200-500:
Image Quality is the best of the 3 lenses
Focus is faster than the Tamron G1 but slower than G2
Retains it's value better than the Tamron

My concern with the Nikkor is the shorter range and the slower focus. I'm wondering if that could cause me to miss some shots that the Tamron G2 might bring home. I have both a D750 and a D7200 I can use it with and of course I want the best IQ I can get.

Does anyone know how different the IQ is between the Nikkor 200-500 and the Tamron 150-600 G2? Is there a significant difference or are they close enough to not really be able to differentiate?

Is it worth the cost to sell the G1 and buy either the Tamron G2 or the Nikkor? Are the benefits great enough to be worth the cost?


Thanks,
Curtis

I personally advise against them. I've seen videos where people have tested their ability to protect the lens (by getting old lenses, putting the UV filter on and dropping the lens on an iron rod) and they basically don't protect your lens at all. All they really do is degrade the quality of the picture. Just being careful with your camera and lens to not drop it is a much better option in my opinion.

Oh sorry, I looked for one but didn't realize I needed to click the All Sections link at the bottom. Thanks for letting me know.

Just wondering what people think about whether it is more beneficial to buy your own printer or whether to utilize one of the professional printing companies for your photos, taking both cost and quality into consideration? I know to buy a good printer is not too expensive but from past experience the cost of the printer isn't where they get you but in the cost of the ink cartridges. It's pretty cheap to have them printed at most the pro printing companies nowadays. By the time you buy the printer and constantly buy new ink cartridges, I'm just wondering if there is any benefit to going that route.

It would have. It was just that I was using a 9 stop ND filter and needed that long to get proper exposure.

One day goofing around I took this long exposure picture of a bridge using a 9 stop ND filter. This was looking across a busy street. Quite a few cars drove across in front of me and even a huge log truck drove through completely obstructing the view for a couple seconds. Yet the picture still came out fine. Exposure time was 130 seconds.

That is a good point. I usually set my WB to cloudy on those overcast days (most of the year here in Oregon) although all that can easily be adjusted in post process.

If you have a smart phone Nikon has an app that will download any of their camera or lens manuals to your phone or tablet. It's great because you always have the manual with you if you have your phone.

If you have a smart phone Nikon has an app that will download any of their camera or lens manuals to your phone or tablet. It's great because you always have the manual with you if you have your phone.

We went up to the waterfall and were driving there at sunrise and it really didn't look any different than it did later except it was a little darker. The pictures came out great in my opinion.

We went up to the waterfall and were driving there at sunrise and it really didn't look any different than it did later except it was a little darker. The pictures came out great in my opinion.

It is but I wasn't sure if it would give off the nice warm glows under a cloudy sky that it does under a clear sky. I haven't really noticed it much on cloudy days since most the time I'm at work when the sun comes up and don't really get to see it.

As everyone knows the golden hour is the best time to shoot most outdoor pictures. But what I'm wondering is if golden hour is still important on overcast and rainy days? I shoot a lot of waterfalls and typically just go during the day since this time of the year it is overcast and you get soft light all day. But I'm wondering if I would get even better pictures by going during the golden hour even on an overcast or rainy day or if it really wouldn't change anything?

PNG format is lossless and supported by most software and browsers.

That's correct. But you need a strong ball head to handle it.

I have the Tamron 150-600mm as well and I recently bought Induro CLT204 carbon fiber legs and Induro BHL3S ball head and that setup holds my camera with any of my lenses, including the big Tamron, super solid. It's all very light and that big solid ball head will easily hold a sidekick if I decide later to get one.