Tamron 200-500 vs. Nikon 80-400 VR (1 Viewer)

[Robert / Seattle]

Has anyone had an opportunity to compare these two lenses for optical quality, mobility in the field and overall utility? I'm planning a trip to Africa and want the best trek-friendly results obtainable for use with my Nikon D2X in the pusuit of wildlife and avifauna.

All thought, comments, and superstitions welcomed.

 

[Jaff]

I'm light years away from an expert here but as you say "trek-friendly" I'm thinking you may be hand-holding in which case the VR must surely be a big plus and the Tamron is too big to hand-hold really and doen't do the lens justice.

Have a look in www.photozone.de for the reviews (albeit they tested the Tamron on a Canon body it's still better than nothing).

Hope this helps.
Jaff

 

[Robert / Seattle]

I'm light years away from an expert here but as you say "trek-friendly" I'm thinking you may be hand-holding in which case the VR must surely be a big plus and the Tamron is too big to hand-hold really and doen't do the lens justice.

Have a look in www.photozone.de for the reviews (albeit they tested the Tamron on a Canon body it's still better than nothing).

Hope this helps.
Jaff

Thanks, Jeff ...

This is useful and much appreciated. Anyone else have some optical comparisons?

 

[nez]

tamron vs nikon

Hi there
I use both theese lenses with my nikon d2oo both are opticaly sound the nikon being the sharpest of the two.The nikon 80-400 is an af lens with an apperture of 4.5-5.6 which is a very good combination to use the only drawback of the lens is the slow autofocus which instead of silent wave technology uses the old screw drive autofocusing method but if the lens is limited birds in flight can be taken too this lens is a great walk about lens andy bright has a site on the web its called digiscoped.com the lens is reviewed there which is the reason i purchased it.Now on to the Tamron this is an impresive lens with an apperture of f4-6.3 whith is very good in good light the lens itself is very well made and for the price is very good value for money i prefer to shoot this lens of the tripod rather than handholding as the size can be a problem of a bean bag there is no problem the lens unlike the nikon has ne vr which means rock steady control or very fast shutter speeds if i had to choose between the two i would go for the nikon its sharper,vr,and an all round great lens.

I hope this info has been helpfull as i say check out andys review on digiscoped.com thanks

 

[Robert / Seattle]

Hi there
I use both theese lenses with my nikon d2oo both are opticaly sound the nikon being the sharpest of the two.The nikon 80-400 is an af lens with an apperture of 4.5-5.6 which is a very good combination to use the only drawback of the lens is the slow autofocus which instead of silent wave technology uses the old screw drive autofocusing method but if the lens is limited birds in flight can be taken too this lens is a great walk about lens andy bright has a site on the web its called digiscoped.com the lens is reviewed there which is the reason i purchased it.Now on to the Tamron this is an impresive lens with an apperture of f4-6.3 whith is very good in good light the lens itself is very well made and for the price is very good value for money i prefer to shoot this lens of the tripod rather than handholding as the size can be a problem of a bean bag there is no problem the lens unlike the nikon has ne vr which means rock steady control or very fast shutter speeds if i had to choose between the two i would go for the nikon its sharper,vr,and an all round great lens.

I hope this info has been helpfull as i say check out andys review on digiscoped.com thanks

A most thorough and thoughtful reply. Thank you Nez, I'll check out your suggested reviews.

 

[Neil]

It depends a lot on how close you will be to wildlife and whether you will be mostly shooting from a vehicle (this would be compulsory/wise in many parts of Africa ). The 300 - 500 mm may be a bit long for elephants and giraffe and more difficult to use in a vehilce.
Neil.