Recommendation for 600mm lens

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

S

Scotland Rocks

New member
Member's gallery
Hi there
I'm a Nikon D7500 user and currently using a Nikkor 70-300mm 4.5-6.3. I've been looking to get a longer lens. I have around £1000 / $1360 budget. From what I can see that leaves me with 2 options,
Tamron AF SP 150-600/5.0-6.3 Di VC USD G2 & Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary Lens. I'm not a techy type person so after reading numerous reviews I can't see a whole lot of difference between them. That's why I thought I'd ask on here to get some real life reviews from others using either of these lenses. My photography is mainly bird / wildlife. The one issue that concerns me is that I find the D7500 lacking when it comes to noise levels. Shutter speed is the priority for me and with the 300mm fully extended and the aperture at 6.3 on an average overcast grey day noise levels seem to ramp up very quickly to 6400 (my set limit). I take it I would still struggle with either of the above lenses as well since it's the camera's ability to handle light and nothing to do with the lens, correct?? I'm sure there must be users of both these lenses out there and you have probably gone through this decision making process already so any assistance / reviews would be gratefully received. It's a lot of money to spend so I want to get it right.
Thanks in advance.
Sandra
 
Member's gallery
I'd also consider the 200-500 - I think it should be in that same price range.

But yes, if you're struggling with F/6.3 you'll continue to do so with any F/6.3 lens.

The biggest challenge is that to get into the 500mm-600mm range at a faster F/stop the price tags go up in a hurry. There just isn't anything out there (or combination of lenses TCs) that will get you to 500mm-600mm at anything faster than F/5.6.

As a side note, take a look at Topaz DeNoise - it might make those high ISOs a little less painful :)
 
Member's gallery
Thanks for responding Steve. That's what I figured. Unless my lottery numbers come in then I'm going to have to make do with one of the above mentioned. Maybe I just don't photograph in typical Scottish weather ;). I had a look at the 200-500 F5.6. Good reviews but a wee bit dearer and appears a lot heaver. I'm not very adept at handheld, tend to use a monopod or tripod whenever I can so maybe that wouldn't be an issue but still a lot of weight to lug around. If I pushed you on the Tamron and Sigma options what would you go for? My preference I think is the Tamron but I know there are occasional issues with freeze up on AF. The other alternative is the Sigma Sport version which might be a bit better than their Contemporary version. Appears to be more aligned with wildlife. A bit dearer but might be worth it though. Sigma 150-600 f5-6.3 Sport DG OH HSM Lens.
Thoughts?

RE Topaz, everyone is recommending it. Up until now I've ignored it as I use Darktable as an editor. (Typical Scot, I don't like to pay for stuff when there's a perfectly good, if not better option out there.) I believe Topaz is now a stand alone, think it used to be a plug in for Photoshop. Not sure how the workflow process will work with Darktable will need to investigate. Perhaps you've come across others combining both?

Appreciate you taking time to respond. Oh and while I'm on, just got your Nikon Exposure ebook. Brilliant. Full of really great info and broken down so I can understand it. My sense of humour as well (y)(y) Requested Autofocus one for my birthday this month. :)

Thanks again
Sandra
 
Member's gallery
Thanks, just watched some interesting YouTube comparisons between the Nikon, Tamron G2 & Sigma sport. Looks like consensus is the Nikon is edges it with better image quality. I suppose it's in my head that I need a 600mm but perhaps there's not much in it between 500 & 600 plus if I currently struggle with noise on the D7500 at 6.3 the fixed 5.6 is going to work in my favour. I suppose it's all about compromise.
 
Member's gallery
Scotland Rocks said:
I suppose it's all about compromise.
Click to expand...

The biggest truth there is in photography, right there. I am also a +1 for the Nikkor 200-500. I had a Sigma Contemporary, and although others have been able to work their samples through enough focus tuning to get them "right" my particular copy "which was bought used" was just always a struggle with focus accuracy. My 200-500 was great until I slipped and fell with it recently. It looks fine, but did take a pretty decent hit. Sending to Nikon today for service. :( It has lost its pop and now seems a little soft most of the time. Thinking it has developed an astigmatism, possibly from the jolt.
 
Member's gallery
Scotland Rocks said:
Thanks to everyone that's responded. After a lot of further videos & written reviews I think I'm going to go for the Nikon option. Surprised me as I'd not really considered it in the first instance. See what the forum does ;) (y)
Appreciate the help.
Sandra
Click to expand...

Sandra,

I first purchased, a while ago, a Tamron 150-600 based on someone's recommendation. The autofocus went out twice and Tamron fixed it twice, but won't do it again. I've barely used the lens since then, several years now. I then bought the Nikon 200-500 and loved it, great lens, a bit heavy but mostly use it on the tripod with a sidekick on a ballhead and that works out pretty good, although it is hard to pick up the whole thing and run with it for some wildlife shots. Most recently I purchased the Nikon 500PF lens and have never even put it on a tripod, everything so far has been handheld, beautiful results. I think wildlife photography is somewhat of a journey with gear. After you get that lens, there will be another one you want, and then a camera that handles low light better (where I'm at now), and on and on. You'll love the 200-500 and it will take very nice shots. Enjoy.
 
Member's gallery
I own the Tamron but if I had to do it again I'd go with the Nikon for the slight edge on AF and the better VR - I just don't find Tamron's VR implementation that reliable. When I bought the Tamron it was significantly cheaper than the Nikon - but now that the gap has shrunk, I'd go Nikon as well.
 
Member's gallery
I have owned the Tamron 150-600 G2, and now have the Nikon 200-500. I believe you are making the right choice to go with the Nikon. I find it sharper, maybe a little faster to autofocus, and a 1/3 of an f-stop after may not seem like much, but it can make a difference at times. I hope you love it once you get it! :)
 
Member's gallery
Also have to agree with the 200-500 being a good choice. For me it's the VR as much as anything else, over time you're technique will improve and you'll be able to drop shutter speeds to control the noise, the 200-500 can be hand held at quite low shutter speeds.
 
Member's gallery
One caveat I shoot 98% hand held. I have owned the Nikon 200-500 and a Sigma 150-600 Sport (quite heavy) both good lenses. Nikon had to fix the 200-500 3 times in a year but then it worked well. For my D500 I now use a Tamron 150-600 G2 that Tamron calibrated to my D500 body ... they calibrate the lens to the body and it is a free service if the lens is in warranty here in the US I do not know about accross the pond. I sold the 200-500 because overall I preferred the results from my calibrated copy of the Tamron 150-600 G2. I have seen good and bad results from both the Tamron 150-600 G2 and the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary ... I have fixed problems for friends on both lenses by cleaning the contact points on their camera and lens even new out of the box they can have residues (I use BD alcohol swabs with the excess liquid squeezed out and wipe in only one direction) that fixes 90% of focusing problems and I clean my cameras and lens contacts after every couple of uses and take care to do it in a clean still environment keeping the body opening pointed down to avoid getting dust into the body. I also have a Sigma 60-600 Sport (it was replaced under warranty) it is heavy but feels lighter than the 150-600 sigma sport the way it balances I keep it in reserve and use it primarily on my D850 not my D500.
 
Member's gallery
Scotland Rocks said:
Thanks for responding Steve. That's what I figured. Unless my lottery numbers come in then I'm going to have to make do with one of the above mentioned. Maybe I just don't photograph in typical Scottish weather ;). I had a look at the 200-500 F5.6. Good reviews but a wee bit dearer and appears a lot heaver. I'm not very adept at handheld, tend to use a monopod or tripod whenever I can so maybe that wouldn't be an issue but still a lot of weight to lug around. If I pushed you on the Tamron and Sigma options what would you go for? My preference I think is the Tamron but I know there are occasional issues with freeze up on AF. The other alternative is the Sigma Sport version which might be a bit better than their Contemporary version. Appears to be more aligned with wildlife. A bit dearer but might be worth it though. Sigma 150-600 f5-6.3 Sport DG OH HSM Lens.
Thoughts?

RE Topaz, everyone is recommending it. Up until now I've ignored it as I use Darktable as an editor. (Typical Scot, I don't like to pay for stuff when there's a perfectly good, if not better option out there.) I believe Topaz is now a stand alone, think it used to be a plug in for Photoshop. Not sure how the workflow process will work with Darktable will need to investigate. Perhaps you've come across others combining both?

Appreciate you taking time to respond. Oh and while I'm on, just got your Nikon Exposure ebook. Brilliant. Full of really great info and broken down so I can understand it. My sense of humour as well (y)(y) Requested Autofocus one for my birthday this month. :)

Thanks again
Sandra
Click to expand...
Greg Basco has an excellent review comparing the Sigma Sport and Contemporary on his website (deepgreenphotography.com). I've used both extensively, but usually go with the Contemporary for the lighter weight especially when carrying my gear on flights. After fine tuning with the Sigma dock, both versions have produced excellent images for me.
 
Member's gallery
Hi Sandra. Several years ago I purchased the D7500 and the same 70-300mm lens you have. About a year later, I then upgraded to the Nikon 200-500, and was amazed at the improvement. More reach and improved AF performance. I’m not familiar with the Sigma or Tamron options, but for the price the 200-500 Nikon is hard to beat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top