Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2015 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?

  
 
shekarn64
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


I could not find a lot of info in the other thread dedicated to 200-500. Just curious to know if anyone switched to Nikon and what is their findings..

Thanks



Nov 20, 2015 at 09:40 AM
tevans9129
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


I am also interested in the answer as I am wondering if there is enough improvements by the Nikon over the Tamron to justify switching.


Nov 20, 2015 at 11:33 AM
DeepShadows
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Me three, have the tamron right now. It's a great lens, but the 200-500 is more what I'm looking for if it is up to the task.


Nov 21, 2015 at 10:38 AM
shekarn64
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Well I just received the Nikon and here are the test shots. Will try to do a full comparison by tomorrow.





Nikon 200-500







Tammy @ 600







Tammy @ 500




Nov 21, 2015 at 11:58 AM
tevans9129
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Thanks shekarn64, very interesting. I would love to see a comparison at or greater than 90'. That is where I am struggling with my Tammy but it may be me and not the lens. I am using a D800e and D7100.


Nov 21, 2015 at 12:15 PM
AvianScott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


I've used both. Quite simply, the IQ, AF speed (marginally), and VR of the 200-500 are all better than the Tamron. The IQ is noticeably better and it's sharper wide open. I much prefer the bokeh of the 200-500 as well.

Edited on Nov 21, 2015 at 02:22 PM · View previous versions



Nov 21, 2015 at 12:53 PM
Tyr-Sog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Since moving back to Nikon I've yet to buy a long lens. Having shot the T150-600 extensively on the 6D and 7DmkII I have always been happy with it's performance. I told myself I'd just buy it again in the Nikon mount.

Of coarse that sort of changed with the announcement/release of the 200-500. Initially I wasn't too impressed with it's early user samples. Just seem to be lacking sharpness and the online videos I saw on the AF speed really seemed to be slow. Slower than the Tamron IMO. I started to lose interest in the Nikon.

I'll say this though. The last few pages of the dedicated thread in these forums have me interested in the Nikon again as there is some top quality shots there. Some of the best I've seen from that lens. Maybe it's being shot at f8 more so now as most of the early samples seemed to be wide-open, i don't know though. Also, out of the superzooms this Nikon has the best bokeh bar none.

The issue arises however is the Tamron can be had for $670-$700 in LNIB condition used. Is the Nikon worth 2x the cost over the Tammy, the age old question lol.

I personally shot the Tamron at 600mm @ 7.1 %95 of the time and thought it was a sharp as it could ever be(and thought wide open was sharp enough when needed). I've read many claim that the Tamron is a whole lot sharper in the 500-550mm range. I'm not sure in that range if the tammy goes back to 5.6 or not. I'd like to see a comparison of the Tammy backed down to 500mm, same F, and side by side comparison of AF speed. If it's on par at that FL, I can't see paying double for the Nikon. Anything form 500mm-600mm is a bonus.



Nov 21, 2015 at 01:04 PM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


AvianScott wrote:
I've used both. Quite simply, the IQ, AF speed (marginally), and VR of the 200-500 are all better than the Tamron. The IQ is noticeably better and it's sharper wide open. I much prefer the bokeh of the 200-500 as well.


Pretty well every reputable review and user account echos this as well.



Nov 21, 2015 at 04:21 PM
GNMink
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Probably the most complete comparison available:
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_200-500mm_f5-6E_ED_VR/

I had the Tamron 150-600 since March and loved it. Sold it and bought the 200-500 a few weeks ago. Really like the colors/contrast better on the Nikon and AF speed seems to be a tad faster but still not super fast. The Nikon is noticeably heavier but still manageable hand held. I do miss the extra reach on the Tamron sometimes but in good light you can use the 1.4x with great results on the Nikon and it gets you to 700.



Nov 21, 2015 at 05:50 PM
shekarn64
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


After two days of shooting with the 200-500, and comparing with my copy of Tammy 150-600...

1. The focusing in Nikon is sweet. It locks the focus without hesitation especially in AF-C mode while Tamron hunts and could not lock a bright brick wall.

2. The VR in Nikon is really good - especially the Normal mode. Makes it easy to compose to shoot but the image jumps a lot when the shutter is fully pressed. Tamron's VR is pretty close to Nikons Sport mode - but Nikon seems to be on the better side.

3. IQ - definitely, Nikon is a clear winner at close range - Great contrast and colors. But long range, it is very difficult to see visible difference between Tammy and Nikon. Tammy can also go up to 600mm which is a great advantage.

For me, I was shooting my Tammy almost always @ 600mm, had to use F8 and 1/800 or faster (No VR and Hand Held) to get sharper image. Tammy is not bad wide open @ 600 mm in good light but my shots are always in low light.

So is it worth upgrading?

1. I can shoot at 500mm with 5.6 and slower shutter speed compared to Tammy @ 600mm. So the advantage is more than 1/3rd stop.

2. I can use 1.4 TC and can go up to 700mm and even at 700mm @F8, I get better result than Tamron @600 mm F8. This is a clear winner for me.

Can I live with the Tamron and not upgrade to Nikon? Sure, Tammy is not bad and I enjoy shooting with it. It is a difficult choice.



Nov 23, 2015 at 12:27 PM
shekarn64
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Man, why Nikon had to do this?





© Shekar 2015





© Shekar 2015




Nov 23, 2015 at 08:06 PM
shekarn64
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Ok, Don't know why the EXIF does not show the lens name - the first one is from Nikon 200-500 and the 2nd is from Tammy!


Nov 23, 2015 at 08:07 PM
Tyr-Sog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Are those back to back shots?


Nov 24, 2015 at 09:05 AM
shekarn64
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


No, The one with Tammy was take a while back. Posted it to show that Tammy can be equally good for me..


Nov 24, 2015 at 09:17 AM
MichaelKirk
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Is the focus on the 200-500 fast enough for sports?

I had a 300/2.8 (used with a 1.4x) a while back and sold it when I gout out of shooting sports. Since that time I've just been using my 70-200/2.8 with the 1.4 and the reach I really not there for field sports and have been wanted something longer.......can't justify the price of another 300/2.8 so looking for alternative options. Have been considering the 300/f4, but the 200-500 looks like a better idea on paper if the focus can keep up.

Michael



Dec 22, 2015 at 12:58 PM
shekarn64
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


I am not a sports photographer and don't have either 300 2.8 or 300 F4. I do have the 70-200 2.8.

The 200-500 focusing is much slower compared to the 70-200 2.8. This may be because of F-Stop difference and various other factors.

The best option for you would be to rent the 200-500 and test it yourself.



Dec 22, 2015 at 01:06 PM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


Is the focus on the 200-500 fast enough for sports?
Sure it is. Shot rodeo and BIF with mine, no probs. There was an AF issue
with some early releases but Nikon corrected it promptly and w/o fanfare.













Dec 22, 2015 at 01:09 PM
cohenfive
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


What sport is that crane playing?

Also, what about the sigma 150-600 sports as another option?



Dec 23, 2015 at 02:46 PM
James R
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


cohenfive wrote:
What sport is that crane playing?

Also, what about the sigma 150-600 sports as another option?


Monkey is just showing off...



Dec 23, 2015 at 03:01 PM
smkunder
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Anyone switched to Nikon 200-500 from Tamron?


I am in same dilemma, just ready to order the Nikon 200-300 5.6 after all the great reviews and them Tamron put out a 120 dollar rebate, so the savings would be about 450.00 of which I could put towards a body upgrade from my D7000. I am still leaning towards the Nikon but it sure is tempting to save some cash right now. I hate these kinds of decisions.


Jun 08, 2016 at 03:38 PM





FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.