Tamron & Sigma 150-600mm vs Nikon 200-500mm

You can stay up to date with Matts latest work at www.mattgrange... - join the mailing list!
Check out the Nikon Expert Setup Guide: learn.mattgran...
/ _mattgranger
/ mattgranger

[@philipandreicuk5356]

Nikon 200-500 attached to the d500 is a dream made in heaven. I have been shooting with it for nearly 2 years and loving it.

[@terrywbreedlove]

Philip Andreicuk I see Nikon just issued a firmware update for the D500

[@JohnOBryan]

I use this same setup for wildlife photography. It really is an awesome combination.

[@dulkifildilu6964]

I too use d500 + 200-500

[@matthewbell1968]

Couldn't agree more. Unbeatable 'bang for the buck'.

[@nikhilbhargav2359]

Will it be compatible with 1.4x tc

[@dennissmeltzer4394]

Relative to focus speed, the Tamron and Sigma are not built to be used right out of the box. They both come with custom focus options. Their focus speed is greatly improved when customization choices are set up that reduce hunting in an expected environment. I do not know if the Nikon has that option, but the other two do and it is an important feature of the two lenses that is ignored in this review.

[@macmcmillen6282]

I own the Sigma Sport 150-600mm. A few things that can really help the performance of this lens is: 1. Make sure you have the latest firmware (update using the Sigma Dock). 2. Customize the "AF Speed Setting" to "Fast Priority AF" (again, using the Sigma Dock). 3. Customize the "OS Setting" to "Moderate View Mode" (via the Sigma Dock). These customizations helped make my lens have faster AF and better image stabilization in the camera's view finder.

[@mikew9788]

Do you like moderate view more then dynamic view? I use dynamic view and the effect in the viewfinder is very noticable.

[@macmcmillen6282]

@@mikew9788 I have the C1 switch customized for moderate view and C2 for dynamic view. Have tried dynamic view for better optical stabilization but didn't see much of a difference in the view finder. Will give it a try again, as I have heard from others that say the same thing as what you said.

[@leewillcocks5372]

But having a faster AF didn't mean it's more accurate. Speeding it up also means it can go past the focus point due to the speed, especially on subjects that are moving. Slowing it down will give better accuracy 🙂

[@macmcmillen6282]

@@leewillcocks5372 true, but depends what your priorities are. I'm a wildlife shooter so fast AF is important to me. While not being as accurate as a slower AF mode, fast priority AF is plenty accurate for my needs.

[@leewillcocks5372]

@@macmcmillen6282 I know what you mean but slower doesn't mean it's not going hit and keep up, just means more accuracy. I'm primarily a wildlife shooter myself so I need the hit ratio high to get the shots i want. But if it works for you the way you have it, that's all that really counts. 🙂

[@AleksandarGospic]

Had this triple dilemma year and a half ago and because of more practical zoom range I went for Tamron 150-600 G2 instead of Nikon 200-500. Never regretted it, it's a great lens, sharp from edge to edge on all focal lengths and stabilisation works great. I agree that Nikon probably has tiny bit better pic quality, and it wouldn't be right if it hadn't cause of less range, but that is negligible, 150-600 range is more important to me. Anyway you can't go wrong with any of these 3 lenses.

[@terryrigby4068]

I've been through a Sigma 150-600C, Tamron 150-600 G1, Nikon 200-500. The 200-500 won hands down so it was the one I kept. I then was able to try the 150-600S and I agree what Matt says about its weight and handling compared to the 200-500 and the images were similar. I then purchased the Sigma dock and tuned the Sigma at all focal lengths and this is when that lens really comes alive. I now only reach for the 200-500 when I don't want to deal with the heft of the 150-600S, all other times the 150-600S is the clear winner.

[@guenni0812]

I think the Nikon 200-500 is the clear winner. I use it on a D500 and it's a fantastic combination. I love it. But I still have a Tamron 150-600 G1 and use it on a D7200. Also this combination is good and gets me regularly on duty. Greeting Günter from Siebengebirge / German

[@eduardofreitas8336]

I have a Tamron G1 and am thinking to upgrade to a nik 200-500 (also on a D500) Do you think it's worth it?

[@guenni0812]

@@eduardofreitas8336 Hello, if you get a super good Nikkor 200 - 500 vr you will be amazed by the imaging performance at 500mm and aperture F. 56. You seldom need to stop down it is simply awesome on the d500. Okay, the AF is a little bit slower than on the Tamron, but much safer and relentlessly grabs. If you can change do it. Greetings Günter

[@agentcrm]

Should check the Sigma Contempary instead of the Sport. closer match price and build wise to the Tamron.

[@vvvvraptorvvvv]

agreed! The Contempary is a closer match to the Nikon and Tamron. He should be comparing the Contempary, not the sport.

[@xaero2006]

It's a fair comparison. Tamron "G1" 2013 is matching Sigma C and G2 the Sigma S version... . I own a Tamron G2 and I can tell you, is a very impressive lens. Anyways, you need to keep in mind the weather for great shots with all of these beasts.. .

[@xaero2006]

@Mozzman you will be amazed of Tamron's performance. My mind was set for Sigma C but I found G2 at 620 € and than I started to search for comparison between C and G2 and, in most of cases G2 beats the s*** out of C :)). Than I started to compare with Sigma S and I saw a true competitor there... . Good choice for Tamron G2 instead of Sigma S because of the price...

[@xaero2006]

@Mozzman true. Weight is not a problem for me, maybe carrying..but shooting no. I didn't tried S version, I don't know the feeling. In future I will buy Sigma 60-600...that extra 90 mm. Again, in comparison with Sigma S, Tamron is true camphion in my opinion because of price, weight and picture quality. Money doesn't justify the S.

[@MikeMenegus]

the Tamron 150-600g2 does lock at any focal length sliding the the adjusting ring, slide forward to lock

[@Equossanos]

D500 and nikon 200-500 is the best bird combo on a budget. You don't even need the 600mm of the tamron or sigma. Been using it and recomending it for a long time now. Even with the cheaper D7XX body its a great go to.

[@DanMikaVideo]

Thanks ! Just bought d7500 and want to decide on these but prefer the nikon 200-500

[@gyozakeynsianism]

@@DanMikaVideo D7500 and 200-500mm is my combo and it works great. Excellent budget option.

[@pauldhoff]

I've been very happy with my Nikon 200-500 with my D7200. Sharp as hell.

[@ddphotoadventure2657]

I have that same combo, great combo

[@marcinbialikiewicz5774]

I still looking for tamron and sigma. If nikon 200-500 is really the best? If is only mark...

[@phillloyd47]

@@marcinbialikiewicz5774 I've not used the sigma but I decided on the nikon because its a constant f5.6, that extra light really helps in bird photography and its light enough to carry around all day.

[@canjo7301]

I have been shooting with the Nikon 200-500 f/5.6 for well over a year and I really think it is the best bang for the buck Nikkor lens I own. Use it on my D700, D7200 and my trusty D300s, the images are great and the VR fantasic when shooting standstill or very slow moving subjects. My 300mm f/4.0 my be a tad sharper but when I add the 1.4 converter it is a subjective toss up and I am back up to f/5.6. You just can not beat convenience of the zoom when shooting kids sports and I hardly use my 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR any longer for the games.

[@sibarsby2522]

Nice little review. I have the Sigma 150-600 sport. Image quality will be lost as the lens needs calibrating to the camera body. Sigma lenses can be out by as much as + /- 14 without calibration! Once calibrated images are pin sharp at 600mm even if shot at distance!

[@jenniferelliott6403]

The red bird is a Cardinal, lol. I recently purchased the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary and I have found it to be a good lens. Can't comment too much yet on focus, etc., because I am still using a D7000, hoping to upgrade to the D500 soon. Anyway, Matt, I think a helpful test for people that are considering these lenses for bird photography is a panning test. The Sigma has 2 stabilization settings and the panning (#2) is quite good. Testing could be made easier to track your drone in flight, making predictable and unpredictable movements, handheld and tripod, on full frame and crop (a lot of bird photographers like crop sensors, I'm sure you know). I have not seen anyone do that sort of test using something that can be replicated like a drone, and I think your opinion of the results would help a lot of people, including myself having already made a purchase. Just a thought as so many of us appreciate your insight. (Also, maybe use the contemporary Sigma because it's similar weight to the others and less money).

[@brandishwar]

I have the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary, and even with that I use a monopod or some other support (fence railing, for example) if I'm out past 300mm to be more stable. But even when in close toward 150mm, it's a beast to handhold. Autofocus can be an issue at times as well, but just make sure you have the AF switch set to FULL.

[@mchlhth]

I've used all three lenses myself on a D500 for bird photography, and I wound up purchasing the Tamron 150-600 G2. I would say up-front that my experience could easily be chalked up to sample variation or possibly the difference between APS-C vs full-frame. The Nikon 200-500mm didn't quite impress me as much and had to be stopped down to f/8 to get detailed images. The Sigma 150-600mm Sport just wasn't good for sharpness, stabilization, or autofocus, and it's comparatively heavy and expensive. The Tamron has the best stabilization, great sharpness at all focal lengths, is reasonably lightweight, and is well-priced. I also have a lot of pleasing images of Great Blue Herons and those "red birds" that "have a baseball team named after them" taken with this combination ;)

[@lukegnanapragasam9070]

Michael Heath Red birds lol, think he's not so good with birding 😂

[@DinoDraghi]

A fair comparison with the Tamron would be the sigma C not S, since the arguments to select the Tamron were the weight and price.

[@MDMiller60]

True, Dino. In that case, I think the Tamron and Nikon would easily outshine the Sigma.

[@trixeylh]

I own both the Nikon 200-500 and Sigma 150-600 sport, and the Nikon is by far the better lens in my opinion. Others have had good results with the Sigma, but my copy was so soft at the long end (500mm plus) that it was pointless going there. No amount of tuning with the dock, Focal and lens align made an improvement. Bad copy/poor quality control maybe, but my 200-500 is tack sharp straight out of the box and returns better images across the focal range. The Sigma would also often hunt like crazy autofocusing with my D500.

[@jasonhutchison2043]

I have just gotten recently the Sigma 150-600mm sports. Matched with my Nikon D800e, it is amazing and I am learning to have fun again.

[@richardb8317]

Hands down the Nikon 200 to 500 rules ...I never leave home without it

[@jibsj2100]

I had the Tamron 150-600 which I sold to get the Nikon 200-500. The Tamron is not sharp wide open, I had to stop it down to f8. But the Nikon is sharp at 5.8 through out the range.

[@fredericpinan3670]

But did you try to fine tune it with the Tap In console? Just to know. Thank you. I have already 2 Tamron, the 24-70 and 70-200mm and I am on the market for a Wildelife télé zoom.. I have issues to setup my mind between the Nikon 200-500 and the Tamron 150-600...

[@matthiasaronjonsson3066]

The Sigma has a lovely push-pull zoom mechanism, it's much faster and easier than by using the zoom ring. I have this lens, it's lovely once you've got it tuned right and gotten used to the weight.

[@matthiasaronjonsson3066]

@@thinktank8389 As far as I know, only the Sport version (S) has built in the push-pull function. I don't have the Contemporary version (C), but judging from pictures of the (C) version, the lens does not have the groove intended for push-pull action.

[@mikew9788]

Funny, I just wrote the same thing

[@Jimmy_Cavallo]

💥💥 I owned the Sigma sport for only a couple of months before selling it. I could not get any sharp images and a few years ago I owned the 50-500. Same horrible experience. The Tamron is excellent.

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

Birds always appear when you've packed up. Murphy's Law. LOL

[@gewglesux]

if he unpacked a again the Loch ness monster would have swam by.

[@chirag4]

LOL, ... i have (read) the book - Murphy's Law .... it's a good read

[@gewglesux]

@@chirag4 Nice one... i hear it is too.

[@hadiraja5456]

Your telling me😂😂

[@filipionutcatalin6477]

When I don't take the camera with me, dragons appears on the sky.

[@little1400]

i think any of these 3 will change the way many of us take photos. i have the Tamron G2. i bought the 600 prime recently and sent it back as its not anything i could walk around with a stalk birds. I love the Tamron and use it often.

[@Bursie]

I own that D500 - Nikon 200-500mm. The biggest reason for getting the Nikkor lens was to have the constant aperture of F5.6. Having the F5.6 all the time takes some of the fuss out of shooting wildlife where everything is happening quickly. Only gripe I have is that the throw is really, really long on that lens though. (and sidenote: my lens would not retract after about 2 years of use. Had it repaired rather quickly after arguing with Nikon repair over the phone.)

[@alwynsmit3546]

And then people argue with me when I say Nikon is not a customer friendly company. I wish I knew this about them before I chose a system, but thanks to Nikon fanboys I was swayed to go that way instead of Canon. Today I'm sorry I did.

[@clemunger1252]

Hi Matt I shoot with the D850 and got after long deliberation the Nikon 200-500 and have not looked back. Works really well. If it was a tad faster it would be unbeatable.

[@lonnieclemens8028]

Thank you for sharing this video. It doesn't surprise me that the Nikon came out with the best image quality. The Tamron is getting some excellent customer reviews. Sigma seems to be improving.

[@qnetx]

I agree that the Sigma Sport version is more difficult to handle than the other two, that is why four years ago I opted for the Contemporary version. I needed a lighter 600mm equivalent than carrying my Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 + 2x extender or a full 600mm Nikkor prime. I wanted a more walk around hand holdable lens since I was used to carrying the Nikkor 300mm and a tripod. The Sigma Sport version weighs almost as much the Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 with a 2x. After years of heavy use photographing primarily wildlife, I found the Sigma to be a great performer and have had no issues. I can lock focus fast (although not as fast a Nikkor prime) and have no problem tracking birds in flight. A lot has to do with how the focus settings are configured. I also primarily use it with the D500 body which is, to me, the ultimate camera for wildlife photography in its price range. I think for your comparison test, the Contemporary version would have been a better model to use since it would also have been in the same price range/weight category as the other two. I have not tried the Tamron or the Nikon zoom but was considering buying the Nikon 200-500 until recently when the 500mm f/5.6 PF ED lens was announced and now I think I would prefer that for its light weight, size, and performance (although it is over double the price of the zoom).

[@ngekseng]

should have brought in the contemporary version instead

[@HiFlyer371]

I have the Sigma Contemporary version and love it. Fairly light for its size and image quality is very close to that on my Canon 70-300L. I've even used it with good results for astrophotography.

[@colinme2672]

I use Nikon D7200 with the the Sigma C. I wasn't happy at 500mm -600 mm until I spent fine tuning with usb dock. Now it is sooooooper sharp.

[@nancystone3793]

I have the Nikon for a d850. The local camera store told me to purchase it over the Tamron. A teacher was purchasing the Tamron for his class, but the employees said it doesn’t handle low light near as well as the Nikon 200-500mm and that’d what I love about my Nikon kit.

[@jss27560]

I bought the 200-500 and so far I'm happy with it. The biggest downside so far is that I need to buy a new bag to carry it. As for the extra reach I'm told it works with the 1.4 teleconverter.

[@JohnOBryan]

I use the Lowepro 13x32cm lens case with my 200-500. Perfect fit!

[@tectorama]

I use the 200-500 on my D500. Excellent combination. Evan more so with the 1.4 adapter

[@summasumma5365]

How much the adapator cost?

[@tectorama]

I bought mine along with the 200-500 Nikkor, as they were doing a special deal at the time. I seem to remember it was around £250, maybe a bit more or less. The lens and TC were £1,499, that was three years ago.

[@HarrieArtGlass]

Thanks Matt, my 200-500 arrives today!

[@erikswenson2659]

Thanks for another useful video. Minor point the length of a lens hood is determined by the shortest, not longest, focal length. -- in order to avoid vinetting. So, the Nikon should have the longest hood.

[@Grogz40]

I bought my Sigma C version back in September and I don't regret my purchase. It is plenty sharp, fast and accurate focusing in good light. A bit of a hit and miss in poor lighting. But I enjoy using it. Mine gets attached to a Nikon D7200. There are many reviews and it seems to go back and forth but I strongly believe at the end of the day, any of these lenses will be great for the casual photographer.

[@johnny_2603]

I love Tamron’s g2 lenses, have the 24-70 and will be getting the 70-200 next. Even with my love for Tamron, I have the Nikon 200-500 as my telephoto lens. It’s better and reasonably priced, unlike all of Nikons other lenses which are better, but cost 2x as much for the marginal increase in performance. I’ve had bad luck with Sigma in the past and my bias won’t allow me to put more money on the line to give them another chance.

[@scuderiaye]

Just bought the Nikon D850, thanks for the video, imma gonna get the Nikon 200-500

[@ThomasHalways]

Great compare, I was always curious how they score against each other in practice. The more that I used to have 200-500mm Nikkor and was astonished about the great price-features balance. Personally I would like to point out also the much better value preservation of the Nikkor: they sell much better than the 3rd party models. One more detail: Sigma has two 150-600 models actually. The Sports is indeed a heavy beast promising a better images quality, but in Matt's observation if I understood it correctly, this was not so. A more comparable lens to the Tamron in terms of weight and price would be the Contemporary version of the 150-600mm Sigma.

[@atl_mx5]

Thanks for this, I bought a used Tamron G2 and I'm loving it lately.

[@TimberGeek]

One reviewer I watched thought the Nikon shot at 500 and cropped to 600 was still sharper than the Tamron & Sigma but IIRC that was the Sigma contemporary and may have been the G1 version of the Tamron. Those Herons do fade into the brush quite well.

[@djdottor]

I'm using the Tamron 150-600 G1, I found it used for half the price :D

[@magik8566]

Excellent lense, I Iove mine ;)

[@McJurrie]

Sounds like a good deal👌

[@FrankNeulichedl]

Yeah, I'm using the G1 for 2 years now, and I bought it for around $500 ... at that price it's nice to have for the 1-3 times I use it a year. Gave me great shots in Costa Rica lately :)

[@djdottor]

@@FrankNeulichedl I bought it for 500€ (1k€ is new in my country). I have a natural reserve lik 5km away from home and I'm 3-5 times a month there :)

[@freddyacosta2358]

Nikkor 200-500mm hands down. I use it with my D800 and D4 and is awesome

[@pmenzel86]

What about the Sigma Contemporary? It's cheaper and lighter than the Sport (which I presume you tested), would be interesting to see how it compares

[@Raysnature]

I've owned the Sigma C (just part xed it) but was never happy with the image quality at the long end (where you need it), tack sharp at 200 but just a tad soft at 600. Brought the Nikon 200-500 and love it; fixed aperture is very useful and very sharp throughout. Interesting to hear Matt talk about it being light; among regular Nikon wildlife shooters it has a reputation as being a heavy lens, dread to think what the sigma s must be like then!

[@chriscollins4710]

Have had the C version for over a year, awesome lens. Don't have any experience with the other lens to compare however. Going to Point Reyes National Seashore later this year and look forward to putting it to good use.

[@griffithbowen4590]

Appreciate this video. I have a nikon d850 and been wanting to get a telephoto. My age is going up too and I'll be going for the nikon. 100%. Thank you.

[@joepalmer75]

Actually the Tamron locks at any length...great comparison video.

[@williamborges3914]

After researching these plus the Sigma contemporary and original Tamron G1, it came down to this: they are all excellent for what they are, I.e. slow super telephoto zooms. That said the Nikon was slightly sharper in some cases, especially in the corners and at the zoom extremes. However, it wasn't that much better. Besides, when shooting wildlife or sports who cares about the corners anyway? The Tamron G2 was next in optical quality followed by the Sigma Sport, the Contemporary, and lastly the original Tamron G1. I was all set to buy the Nikon. But, in comparing the build quality to the others I got turned off. Other than the lens glass and metal lens mount, the Nikon is all plastic. With it's general lack of weather sealing it sucked and puffed air almost as well as my Giotto Rocket. In contrast the Sigma Sport with it's mostly metal construction is built like a weather-sealed tank. However, at $2k it was out of my budget. Fortunately, the weather-sealed metal-and-plastic-hybrid construction Tamron G2 did fit the budget. So, I took a leap of faith and bought the Tamron and have been pleased with it ever since. Check these shots taken late in the day. I think you'll understand why weather-sealing was such an important consideration in selecting the Tamron. photos.app.goo.gl/QATLnGNyEkVcfpwZ9

[@ketanmahida]

I'm confused which lens to buy. Thanks for your advice for buying Nikon/Temron.

[@ianbachanek2538]

I've owned the Sigma S for about 1.5 years and love it. Not going to repeat the other points in the comments but will add that Sigma C, Tamron, and this Nikon all built in China. Sigma S built in Japan. Long term I think you will see the value of a Japanese built tank vs the lighter plastic Chinese built lens. Sigma S also has weather and dust sealing. Again long term a better investment.

[@lauchlanstill6677]

Yea but the Nikon photos looked better?

[@pjimmbojimmbo1990]

I have never even seen a Tamron or Sigma 150-600, but I have had the Nikon 200-500 for over 6 yrs. It does a good job, and on my D810 was sharp, even wide open. The VR is very good, it has allowed many Shake Free shots as low as 1/15sec @500mm. I did manage to get the Lens for about $300 below List in Dec 2015, but even if the List Price was $300 higher, it still would have been good VFM

[@edwardneuman6061]

Woof, I can't Imagine the Sigma being heavier than the Nikon. I have the Nikon, and it's a beast, but it does produce excellent images with my D500.

[@Stefan1968ful]

If you just want to take pictures of birds, any of these lenses will be good enough for this purpose. I had the Nikkor 200-500mm and also the Sigma 150-600mm. So I could compare it well. However, if you are deep into Wildlife and especially bird photography, it is all about what we call "feather perfection". Means, you wan to see the details of the bird feathers or the details of the bird eye. And for this there is no alternative to one of the 600mm primes which is IMO the ideal focal length for birding (does not matter what brand, Canon or Nikon). Even when not going with the current version but the previous version will make it as usually the optical formula does not change that much, it is more about weight reduction or coating. When I realized that I sold all the Zooms for getting such a prime lens (in my case a Nikkor 600mm 4.0 FL) without any regret.

[@CloverPhotoandVideo]

Nice video Matt! I have the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary and am generally pleased with the results. The Contemporary version can sometimes be soft, especially above 500mm, but I find that as long as I have good light, and can keep the shutter speed high, photos are usually pretty sharp. I rented the Nikon 200mm-500mm and agree it's a great lens, but I bit heavier and bulkier than the Sigma C. I also like the fact that you can customize the Sigma lens with the Sigma dock, to fit your shooting style.

[@colinme2672]

You need to spend time with the usb dock to find tune it. Takes a while but mine is now super sharp

[@winsaratravelpixwinsaratra7984]

Undoubtedly nikon 200-500f5.6 is the best of all.

[@Cryect2]

Tamron 150-600 G2 btw is only $950 currently on Massdrop.

[@austin9845]

Oof, it hurts that I paid $500 more than this

[@rlunzer]

I just contacted Tamron and was told that Massdrop isn't a dealer. They said that the lenses wouldn't be warrantied by Tamron US and could not be repaired by an authorized facility.

[@Cryect2]

@@rlunzer Ah damn, I had a suspicion they would likely be gray market lenses.

[@blakeparry1983]

Have shot the Sigma sport and the nikon The Sigma is a lot heavier, but you're getting a lot better build quality and weather sealing (hence the tighter zoom you noticed Matt) I own the Nikon, the little bit more light at F5.6 and the portability is useful, and the VR is class leading. Sharpness was equal between the two for me. The Nikon takes a 1.4x TC quite well too (thanks to that aperture)

[@sam675r]

thank you have been deliberating over these 3 lens thats helps a lot

[@anuragchoudhury8332]

Nikkor 200-500 or tamron 600mm g2 which is better ?? Please reply

[@user-ng4jj8wg8c]

Top notch video. I also like the sharper pictures of the Nikon lens. Thanks for sharing your experience with us. ❤❤❤❤

[@andrear9500]

Weather sealing could be key factor if on boat with some splash or in the dustiest safari or in the stickiest rainforest. And Sigma has the best build. Otherwise spare money with the other two or with the Sigma contemp which has only mount sealing

[@Lordac]

Thanks for the compare Matt. I'm in the market for one of these. My only wish (which others have already stated) is that you compared the Sigma Contemporary as opposed to the sport. I think for myself I'm going to purchase the Nikon version. I'll use your link to B&H to support the channel. I've already checked and the price is the same.

[@pradeepmysr]

Hey Matt, I use sigma 150-500 in 80d body for birds. Give me good composition for flying birds in day light and at sunrise time.

[@mikepiskula4762]

Good video. Had the Sigma 150-600 C. Never had good luck with it ( bad copy? ) My wife got better results with the Gen 1 Tamron . I traded in the C for the 200-500 when they had the instant rebate. 200-500 is noticeably sharper, heavier, more accurate autofocus...but the autofocus speed seems slower.

[@RoundBallDefender]

I see you said the tameron only locks at 200. But I believe on the tameron, you can pull forward on the zoom ring, and it will lock at any zoom.

[@shawnvine4918]

Thanks, t's always nice to hear about more than just the specs. Weight is definitely a factor, as well as price. Thanks.

[@Michiel1972]

I prefer the Sigma 100-400mm with a D7200 as walkaround lens and body. Which is half the weight of the Nikon 200-500mm in combo with a D500. It´s way easier to keep the camera still for handheld shooting. Exspecially when it´s abit windy. With the D7200 you kinda compensate a bit for the loss of the reach, since the D500 is 20,9 megapixels, while the D7200 has 24,2 megapixels. When shooting from a bird hide the best choice is imho a 600mm prime. I also recommend to take bird pictures during the golden hour. Which is about two hours after sunrise or before sunset. Two reasons for that. 1. Light 2. Birds in general don't like it when there are many people around. Early in the morning and around dinner time most people don't walk around in nature.

[@thomastuorto9929]

always good to here that the Nikon wins your opinion. Because I own that lens & have grab a few good pics from it. Although I own all Nikon lens I would consider the Tamron 24-70 g2 for my next lens purchase. Thanks for the great review.

[@MichaelMa]

Nikon all day. Best contrast and colors.

[@DeeDeeDIY]

Thank you for the review!

[@Narsuitus]

I use the following manual focus prime lenses for surveillance, sports, air shows, birds, and other wildlife: 135mm f/2 200mm f/5.6 300mm f/6.3 400mm f/5.6 500mm f/4 I have been considering upgrading my manual focus long prime lenses to auto focus long zoom lenses. I like the extra focal length range of the Sigma 150-600mm and the Tamron 150-600mm zoom lenses compared to the Nikon 200-500mm. However, since I prefer a fixed maximum aperture like the Nikon f/5.6, I will not even consider the variable maximum aperture of the Sigma f/5 to f/6.3 or the Tamron f/5 to f/6.3 zooms. Also, since I need lenses with an aperture ring, I will not even consider the Nikon, the Sigma, or the Tamron because none have the aperture ring that I need for exposure control when I use my lenses on my older Nikon SLR film cameras.

[@corrbox2]

Thank you for your review. Very interesting information. I'll follow up with tests of my own. I appreciate your efforts on our behalf. 📸

[@sidvicious3129]

I own the Nikon 200-500 and the Tamron 150-600 g1 and use them mostly on my Nikon d500. I find the image quality better on the Nikon, but the g1 is a little lighter than the Nikon. I’m happy with both lenses.

[@mraxlrose2959]

The Nikon has good bokeh too.

[@jonerdmann6512]

Thanks for the great review Matt.

[@ldstirling]

I'm positive that others have said this already, but you're not comparing apples-apples with the Sigma Sport lens. This is about half a step up on the Tamron and Nikon lenses in the comparison, which is evident in the price of the lens. Should have looked at the Sigma Contemporary for a real even comparison.

[@K9malinois_dog_love]

Since this was a sport lenses review I was hopping to see the AF on fast animal tracking or other objects for that matter because that’s when a lens shows it’s tru color.

[@MyAmericanMorning]

I rented and shot with both versions of the Tamron (G1 and G2), and with the Nikon; I have not shot with the Sigma lens. My experience suggests that the Nikon 200 to 500 is so much better than either version of the Tamron in both handling and image quality. I agree with Matt's opinion, except that I found both Tamrons to be useless after around 400 mm on my Nikon D610; vibration control did not hold the image steady enough to compose a shot after 400 mm. I only had the Nikon a couple of weeks but some of my favorite all-time shots happened in those weeks, wildlife and landscape. I can't afford a new lens right now. But if I could, it would be the Nikon 200 to 500. On the other hand, my favorite lens that I currently own is the Tamron 70 to 200 G1.

[@emileviljoen]

Great review Matt. I bought the Sigma 60-600 Sport in May. I was sold on the reach but in real life the lens just did not perform. Never sharp on the long end. I got better results after AF fine tuning on the Nikon D500 but still not as sharp as I expected for the price. After taking more than 3000 wildlife photos with it on a trip through northern Namibia in Africa I was convinced I made the wrong choice, lost a lot of money selling it. Bought the Nikon 200-500, right out the box it was tack-sharp - to the point where I would say the fact that the Sigma went to 600mm makes no difference. I would easily crop the Nikon's images to match the 600mm of the Sigma and it would still be sharper. So yes I totaly agree with you. Sigma's sport lenses built quality is superb, but it is not as sharp as the much cheaper Nikon.

[@sveneezy2059]

The one we all have been waiting for!!!

[@magottyk]

I have the Tamron 150-600 version A011 (the first one), it's fairly sharp up to 450-500mm and starts falling away after that at f6/6.3 but it's still very good the rest of the distance and going to f7.1-f8 tightens it back up. I've paired it with a kenko 1.4X pro 300 (recently acquired) on a D3200/5300 (original firmware) and while you lose auto focus and rangefinding, it's an easy lens to focus by eye manually and gets you 1275mm equivalency, though it's not something I'll do very often as the loss of IQ is noticeable (distant subjects), but some closer subjects did look ok, still testing. Excellent combo with a DX sensor for added reach.

[@simon_patterson]

I have the same Tamron lens and only use it at f/8, where I'm very happy with its performance. I haven't used a teleconverter though - it won't take my Nikon 1.7x teleconverter.

[@magottyk]

@@simon_patterson Nikon teleconverters are reknown for not being usable without the right lens, the kenco is the opposite being very usable on a wide range of lenses including AF screw type, though most likely to show incompatibilities with Tamron. All my f5.6 lenses work with it and autofocus may or may not work with lenses beyond that. I have the Nikon AF-P 70-300 DX f4.5-6.3 and it works but the Tammy 150-600 also a 6.3 doesn't autofocus at all and is a bit twitchy with the aperture though it mostly reads correctly making it usable with manual focus in S,A, or M modes. I have Two Tammy 70-300 f5.6's one an AF LD Di and the other the Di VC USD and both autofocus as well as both Tamron 90mm f2.8 macros (one AF and one with inbuilt motor) also fully work. My copy of the 150-600 has an irregular minor backfocus issue and seems to focus better with -8 dialled in with fine tune on my D600, though it's still a bit hit or miss just not as often and I still get good shots with fine tune turned off. On the D5300 it's 50/50 whether a shot at 600mm f6.3 is moderately sharp or a bit soft, at f8 it's all good. I honestly wouldn't bother with a teleconverter for the big Tammy for regular use, the tradeoffs aren't generally worth it as even with careful manual focus, it's just too soft at the long end and you get better results just using APS-C's crop factor. There are a few caveats where the TC gets you more pixels for the subject and can show additional detail. I have a test street sign 300 metres away and the 600+APSC+1.4TC did make the street sign more readable because there were more pixels, but that's high contrast and micro contrast is diminished in the background trees, but leaves are bigger. Perhaps the G2 and Tammy 1.4X might be a half decent working combo, but the Tammy TC won't work with the original 150-600 and is rather expensive @$400+

[@simon_patterson]

@@magottyk yeah I don't mind the fact the teleconverter doesn't fit to the 150-600. I don't even use the 1.7x teleconverter on my Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 because I find the reduction in image quality is roughly equivalent to simply cropping the unteleconverted image in post anyway! It's a pretty useless piece of equipment, actually, now I think about it. I haven't used the teleconverter for years. I didn't have the strong backfocus issues my 150-600 that you did - I did adjust the focus in my d800 and I can't remember what adjustment I needed to make, but I do remember it was only minor. Nothing like -8.

[@magottyk]

@@simon_patterson My 1.4X Kenko is very usable on a good lens for the added reach, on my 27 year old AF 80-200 f2.8 it works great with no discernible IQ loss. Using it for macro gets me 1:1.4 at closest focus allowing me to maintain working distance with either the Tammy 90mm or Nikon 105mm VR macro lenses rather than the shorter distance macro tubes get me and can also be combined with macro tubes too of which I have the kenko set which also maintain the communication and autofocus with the lens. In fact one of the main reasons for buying the 1.4X teleconverter is to work with macro.

[@BlackDim100]

I use the Sigma with my Canon EOS R and it's fantastic.

[@dirktassaert6579]

My old Nikon D3s + 200-500mm👍👍

[@ussmillerco]

Quite interesting comments. Most are subjective. But I wonder, how many slightly softer images from any of these lens compared are due to camera shake, atmospheric anomalies, lens calibrations, differences in copy’s, in camera calibrations, ones particular eye, subject movement, and any other thing that could effect testing. I have just bought a used Tamron G2, that I checked out before purchasing (at less than 1/2 price of new). So I have no dog yet in this fight. Considering all 4 of these lenses (sigma contemporary also valid choice), I’m not worried about whether I made the wrong choice, as with most of these lenses if you get a reasonable copy, without damage or too many blemishes, and all functions work as expected, take care of them while in your potential, you can use them to full potential, and get great images, then later, you can simply sell them at or near your buying price. Remember with all these considerations made, you can be happy with all of them. A tremendous image is rarely primarily a gear produced result. Certainly none of these are $10k fixed aperture primes, so you can compare these 4 lenses till your blue in the face and you’ll not attain IQ of those primes, having said that get out there and shoot what you have, and focus on composing, lighting, technique, and the luck that great images make. Master your particular photography interest, with the tools you can afford, then add/exchange gear as you grow. Note: having numerous choices at every other focal length, to me the Tamron is the best detachable long lens for me, only because at this point, it’s the only one I have at that focal length (for now). I also own the Sony Rx10m4, which I love for its features/reach. Good Luck.

[@ussmillerco]

Ps. I shoot Nikon, for stills I shoot D4, D500, D750, and D850. Video it’s the D500, or Sony RX10M4.

[@inspiredartphotos]

I rented both the Sports and the lighter Contemporary. I bought the Contemporary. In deep pixel peeping they were the same. The Sports is weather sealed but my Contemporary has been excellent.

[@raduardeleanu4800]

Hi, thanks for the great review, I agree with you 100%, played around with all of them but the Nikon is the one I use for birds, I have it on a d750 and it is magical !

[@JBMejiao]

Excellent comparison; especially because you choose a "WINNER". Not like other reviewers who say: "# 1 is very good... but # 2 has this and... # 3 that other... what do you think? Which one do you prefer?" Following that same line: to choose a "winner", I suggest compares Nikon 14-24 f2.8G / ED vs. Sigma 14-24 f2.8 DG HSM Art vs. Tamron SP 15-30mm f / 2.8 Di VC USD G2. Thanks for all your content. Excelente comparación; especialmente porque eliges un "GANADOR". No como otros reseñadores que dicen: "#1 es muy bueno... pero #2 tiene esto y #3 aquello otro... ¿qué opinan ustedes. Cuál prefieren?." Siguiendo esa misma línea: de escoger un "ganador", sugiero compares Nikon 14-24 f2.8G/ED vs. Sigma 14-24 f2.8 DG HSM Art vs. Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

[@shoeysindel3743]

Yes, I am in the market for a wide and would appreciate a Nikon 14-24, Sigma 14-24 and Tamron 15-30 comparison as well. Thanks in advance.

[@dcornwell7130]

As has been mentioned you probably should have compared with the 'C' version then stated the difference with the Sport in terms of image quality, build quality, weather sealing vs extra weight and cost. Also there should have been some emphasis on the useful and cheap fine tuning docking station which can make quite a difference. Otherwise a balanced review.

[@1solorainforest]

WOW....wish i had these for my wildlife... Great video 👍

[@scanor]

Have used both the sigma and G2 tamron.. and I swear by the Tamron.. Image quality is deffo on par with the sigma, it feels good, it's way lighter and cheaper. I find it bit for bit superior in all departments and also very good value. Both on the EOS 7D mk2 and EOS 1Dx mk2 I got better results and overall quality with the Tamron and at a way better price point.

[@MonanzaFTW]

Very helpful! Thanks for putting this together Matt 👍🏻

[@benharris3949]

That was an interesting comparison, the Nikon surprised me with the image quality over the other two. I was hunting for heron the other day and it appeared when I put my camera away too!

[@edubassplayer2]

The review I needed, thanks

[@terrywbreedlove]

My friend has that Tamron and I will tell you it is very sharp. I don’t know how good it will focus though. I am going to buy the Nikon myself I learned years ago it just works better camera to camera.

[@terrywbreedlove]

John J this is going to be way out there in today’s digital world but I wonder if I buy a nice F5 if the Nikon will work with it. I have been shooting lots of black and white film and working in the dark room

[@hadiraja5456]

I love the Tamron G2

[@buticks]

I am disappointed that you used the Sigma sport and not the contemporary

[@CAbbott71]

Whats the value proposition for the Sigma Sport? Is that weight due to more solid components and better sealing? Walking around Central Park is one thing, but if you are trudging through wilderness where lenses may get wet and muddy and possibly banged against rocks and trees, better build quality might save you. Does the "sport" model have that extra resilience to command the higher price tag

[@lonnieclemens8028]

Thank you for sharing this video. It is critical information to those who are shopping a for lens.

[@Odinthesleepy]

I own the 200-500 and the 500Pf. I shoot the 2-5 10x more. Thr PF is lighter and sharper but sometimes 500 is just too much.

[@topnaturephotosaddriya955]

I love sigma 150mm-600mm contempory

[@Noriuslephotographe]

did you try to update the firmware on sigma (the only one that does that) it's way faster then nikon (20to 50%) faster depending on the way you tweet it...the hub to do this is only 50$ US, through a USB 2 port

[@geforce5591]

Should have gotten the 60-600mm sigma. That's also $2000 iirc.

[@AsifAli]

Tobi Ogunsanwo that is amazing lens and its very sharp and fast focus