You can stay up to date with Matts latest work at www.mattgranger.com/ - join the mailing list! Check out the Nikon Expert Setup Guide: learn.mattgranger.com/courses... / _mattgranger / mattgranger
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.
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.
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.
@@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.
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 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.
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 🙂
@@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.
@@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. 🙂
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 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
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.. .
@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...
@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.
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).
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.
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.
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 !
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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 ;)
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.
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.
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.
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.
💥💥 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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
Hey Matt. I would love to see a comparison between a tamron 150-600g2 and canon 100-400ii on a crop body. I'm into surf photography but very interested to see if the image quality from the 100-400 versus the tamron. I hear it can be cropped and still look sharper than the tamrons and sigmas at the longest end . ? Love to see a review like this 👍
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.
@@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.
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.)
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.
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.
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).
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)
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.
awesome video as usual im not a pro but a very passionate severely sight impaired/blind photographer and im in market for my nikon z7 camera a wildlife lens was looking at the nikon 200-500mm wuth adapter but now looking at the sigma 100-400 but watching this video and might consider the tamron 150-600 now any suggestions would be great cheers
Matt, I've got the Nikon 200-500 along with a D500 and D850. When I shoot the D850 in DX mode with the 200-500, the images are distinctly smaller than when I shoot it with the D500. Was wondering if this difference would be due to the lens or the camera and if this same issue may carry over to other lenses such as the Tamron or Sigma.
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
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!
Thanks for this great review. Now you are switched to a Z camera, would your conclusion this the same? Or have you also shot with the Sigma 60600 and if yes, how this it compare?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Hi Matt, Thanks for another great lens review, Could i be a pain and ask if you could please do a short review of the roller camera bag that you were using as i noticed that it had four wheels and i have been looking for one that is Airline Cabin friendly! Thanks... All the best Gary
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.
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!
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.
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.
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 $300 higher, it still would have been good VFM
I've owned the Sigma S for about 1.5 years and love it. Not going to repeat the other points in the comments but will add that Sigma C, Tamron, and this Nikon all built in China. Sigma S built in Japan. Long term I think you will see the value of a Japanese built tank vs the lighter plastic Chinese built lens. Sigma S also has weather and dust sealing. Again long term a better investment.
I own the Nikon 200-500 and the Tamron 150-600 g1 and use them mostly on my Nikon d500. I find the image quality better on the Nikon, but the g1 is a little lighter than the Nikon. I’m happy with both lenses.
did you try to update the firmware on sigma (the only one that does that) it's way faster then nikon (20to 50%) faster depending on the way you tweet it...the hub to do this is only 50$ US, through a USB 2 port
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.
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 :)
Hi Matt. Thanks for your review! I ordered the Nikon 200-500 yesterday. I will be using it with my new Nikon Z6 which has built-in IS. Do you know if the IS in the lens will play nice with the camera IS, or should I disable one or the other?
@@brad_neal I had the Tamron 150/600 mm G1. Its an amazing lens however with my Z6 the AF is not working. The G2 works with Z6 after an update of the firmware. I have ordered the Sigma 150/600mm and will receive it tomorrow. Will confirm you the results
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
great vid - thanks. I have a D500 and was weighing up the tamron G2 or nikon 200-500....I predominantly shoot rugby in winter...so maybe i should be going for the Tamron. Weather sealing. can anybody tell me differently?
