p.89 #1 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
^ Nice bird, too bad about the background. Speaking of which...
anyone else super impressed with the way an f5.6 zoom just
melts the BG's shot wide open?! SOOC
p.89 #5 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
rick_reno wrote:
Wow Will, fantastic. It's so good I assumed it was shot with the 500 f/4
Crazy, huh?! Thanks! I know, it's mind boggling. Of course at my age, it doesn't take much.
Even better on the D810 when one fills the frame. That's downright scary, no?!
p.89 #7 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Some pics my wife took with our 200-500 over the past few days.
We have owned the Tamron 150-600 and the Sigma 150-600 contemporary and found the Nikon to be sharper.
I have the new Tamron 150-600 G2 coming on Tuesday.
I'm looking forward to playing around with it and I'll post some comparisons with the Nikon.
p.89 #9 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
morris wrote:
Hi Maranda,
Nice images, perticulary the flicker. Are you sharpness comparisons at the same 500mm focal length?
Morris
No scientific comparison Morris, just used both them at the same time over the course of several months.
The Tamron I sold before I had the Nikon but looking back at the images it's pretty obvious the Nikon was sharper. I never had to AF adjust for the Tamron it seemed to be spot on but the Nikon is AF needs +3 on all of the bodies I've used it on. The Sigma contemporary was ok, probably on par with the results from the Tamron but I wasn't impressed with the IQ. I've got several friends that use the Sigma Sport and it seems to be pretty sharp and the fastest focusing of all the budget long zooms.
p.89 #12 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
GNMink wrote:
No scientific comparison Morris, just used both them at the same time over the course of several months.
The Tamron I sold before I had the Nikon but looking back at the images it's pretty obvious the Nikon was sharper. I never had to AF adjust for the Tamron it seemed to be spot on but the Nikon is AF needs +3 on all of the bodies I've used it on. The Sigma contemporary was ok, probably on par with the results from the Tamron but I wasn't impressed with the IQ. I've got several friends that use the Sigma Sport and it seems to be pretty sharp and the fastest focusing of all the budget long zooms....Show more →
I've tried them all. I tried the Tamron I and put it down. Then later the same afternoon picked up the Sigma Sport and fell in love. Sharp and fast and works in low light. When the Sigma Contemporary came out I picked it up and felt it was a little better than the Tamron I, nothing to get excited about. For me the Nikon 200-500 is also fast and sharp, it lacks in focal length yet is lighter.
p.89 #13 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
morris wrote:
I've tried them all. I tried the Tamron I and put it down. Then later the same afternoon picked up the Sigma Sport and fell in love. Sharp and fast and works in low light. When the Sigma Contemporary came out I picked it up and felt it was a little better than the Tamron I, nothing to get excited about. For me the Nikon 200-500 is also fast and sharp, it lacks in focal length yet is lighter.
Morris
I think that sums it up Morris, The Tamron G2 looks good on paper and I'll have one on Tuesday just in time for our trip to Orange Beach, AL so I'll put it to the test and report back.
p.89 #14 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
First day out, don'tcha just love new toys. Pretty pleased so far, haven't dialed 'er in yet but so far so good. Focus is definitely not quick but once locked on she stays there nicely.
