• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Best long lens for about a grand for D7200 (1 Viewer)

Neil G.

Well-known member
The Tammy hasn't got that much of a reach advantage as it is a little soft at 600mm according to most reviews,you will end up backing off to maintain good sharpness,losing the advantage of the extra reach. Also,because the 200-500 has the constant 5.6 aperture it is better with a 1.4x teleconverter.......something else to consider.
I'm not trying to put you off the tammy..........its just that i know how good the 200-500 is.......it may also have better resale value down the line if you decide to sell it at a later date.
 

marcsantacurz

Well-known member
You will take great photos with either the tammy 150-600 g2 or nikon 200-500. There's really not a wrong answer between the two. It is all trade-offs.

Personally, I found the 200-500 a bit bulky for travel around Alaska where I had to limit my gear size, that is why I sold it and went to the Tammy. I was also not happy with the 200-500 + 1.4x TC as that bumped it up to f/8 and I lost 3d AF tracking and only got AF in the center few AF points. The other issue with the 200-500 + 1.4x TC is you're now at 700mm (or 1050mm equivalent) on a slow f/8 lens. You need either good support or a very fast shutter speed, but at f/8 (and you'd likely want to bump up a little for more sharpness), that means you need a few extra stops of ISO which could be an issue unless you have very good lighting.

Many people do pull back the 150-600 to about 550mm for extra sharpness. I usually don't do that and am happy with the results. I think lens-to-lens variation matters a bit here. 550mm on a DX body is 75mm extra over a 500mm lens. Or if you go to 600 it's 150mm extra. Not a lot, but it helps.

Anyhow, pick the lens you think you'll use and are comfortable carrying. That's the big thing: get out and use it. Whatever you get, there will always appear to be greener grass somewhere else. I would also base my decision on the base lens without TCs. At f/5.6 or f/6.3, they have more downsides than upsides, in my opinion (this is not true for the higher-end f/4 or f/2.8 lenses). They can have their uses on those lenses, but only in certain circumstances.

Marc
 

Apodidae49

Well-known member
Thanks for the input Marc. I think, as an enthusiastic amateur and not a dedicated photographer, I will probably be happy with the results from the Tamron, but there are some stunning results for both lenses on view on the internet. The Tamron certainly seems a bit less of a lump to carry around and I’m not planning on using a TC. I’m going to use a Black Rapid Curve Breathe strap with it to make it more comfortable to carry and lessen the strain on the lens mount.
 

marcsantacurz

Well-known member
A lot of the stuff on the Internet will not show the slight technical differences between the two lenses -- only highly cropped or high-res will show the difference, assuming the photographers are equally skilled and equally lucky to be in the right place at the right time.

Having the right technical settings (speed, f/stop, ISO), good shooting technique, and proper composition for a given scene will, I think, mostly outweigh the technical differences between those two lenses. Pick the one you personally like best and shoot it. Improve your technique and style, then re-evaluate.

Marc
 

Apodidae49

Well-known member
A lot of the stuff on the Internet will not show the slight technical differences between the two lenses -- only highly cropped or high-res will show the difference, assuming the photographers are equally skilled and equally lucky to be in the right place at the right time.

Having the right technical settings (speed, f/stop, ISO), good shooting technique, and proper composition for a given scene will, I think, mostly outweigh the technical differences between those two lenses. Pick the one you personally like best and shoot it. Improve your technique and style, then re-evaluate.

Marc

Heart says Nikon, head (and load bearing parts of my anatomy) says Tamron. Still got a way to go before acquisition though.

Off to the Cairngorms on Tuesday, with the 70-300, in search of crested tits and golden eagles.
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
Again, it's all been said multiple times before.
One offers more reach, one a little less but slightly more speed.
At the end of the day there will be not one jot of practical difference between them. Individual unit to unit variation will account for any differences. Your technique and skills will make an even bigger difference. Note too that in 1.3x in-camera crop mode of which the D7200 is capable of, 100mm difference becomes 200mm .....

The biggest difference will be in the quantifiable weight, and handling. That's up to your preferences.

Really your decision is made. Tammy G2 for £650 .... !
https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=3914327#post3914327





Chosun :gh:
 

Apodidae49

Well-known member
Again, it's all been said multiple times before.
One offers more reach, one a little less but slightly more speed.
At the end of the day there will be not one jot of practical difference between them. Individual unit to unit variation will account for any differences. Your technique and skills will make an even bigger difference. Note too that in 1.3x in-camera crop mode of which the D7200 is capable of, 100mm difference becomes 200mm .....

The biggest difference will be in the quantifiable weight, and handling. That's up to your preferences.

Really your decision is made. Tammy G2 for £650 .... !
https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=3914327#post3914327





Chosun :gh:

Thanks for the insight Chosun. As to the lens you linked to above it’s from MH-Direct. A year ago, when I had my D5600, I bought one new from MH-Direct and Tamron UK wouldn’t register it as it was a grey import, so I sent it back. Not sure where 2nd owners come in the warranty pecking order but I’m pretty sure nowhere would be the answer in this case.
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
Thanks for the insight Chosun. As to the lens you linked to above it’s from MH-Direct. A year ago, when I had my D5600, I bought one new from MH-Direct and Tamron UK wouldn’t register it as it was a grey import, so I sent it back. Not sure where 2nd owners come in the warranty pecking order but I’m pretty sure nowhere would be the answer in this case.
Ok - fair enough. I've never really put much faith in warranties at this level. A $10K lens or something might be a different matter.

Tamron offers a 24 month warranty from date of purchase in this country if it was through an approved retailer. Very rare for products to fail within the warranty period though ..... however the day after the period expires is another matter entirely !

I'd be more inclined to put more faith in a 2nd hand unit in good condition and operational order, and that came from a reputable source with verifiable unit history. Being able to check and test the operation on your camera (I mean test in detail - AF fine tuning to your particular camera body, resolution charts, and processing of full RAWS) could be worth more than any warranty, and the savings over new would have to be worth something.

They'll be numbers and decisions for you to crunch.

There would be a large quantity of these operating outside of the warranty period now, as AFAIK, there are no major widespread quality or reliability issues. In fact it seems that photographers wear out before their gear does - with most eventually downsizing due to mobility issues etc, or hanging up the lens caps all together !




Chosun :gh:
 

Apodidae49

Well-known member
The deeper I delve into this long zoom malarkey the more I keep seeing the phrases “good example” and “bad example” and “fine tuning using the dock” with regard to the Tammy and the two Sigmas.

Now call me a sceptic snowflake but I don’t want to be getting a “bad example” and having to send it back to the manufacturer and I don’t want to be fannying around with a lens dock as that isn’t where my level of expertise is at.

I have veered like a weather vane between Tammy and Nikon and am gradually settling towards the Nikon knowing I can add a Nikon 1.4x TC later if I like.
 

Neil G.

Well-known member
In my opinion that is the right decision,i've yet to see images taken with the tamrons and sigmas that exceed those taken with the Nikon,in fact compared to my Nikon lens i've yet to see them matching it to be honest.
 

Apodidae49

Well-known member
In my opinion that is the right decision,i've yet to see images taken with the tamrons and sigmas that exceed those taken with the Nikon,in fact compared to my Nikon lens i've yet to see them matching it to be honest.

I know it’s heavier but that isn’t a deal-breaker (the weight of the 150-600 Sigma Sports is a deal/back breaker)

It feels good on my camera body and I’ve got a couple of folders of shots taken with the Nikon and the Tammy on my D7200 and there isn’t much in them size-wise at full zoom.
 

Apodidae49

Well-known member
Got my Nikon 200-500 today for a Black Friday price of £999, and from a reputable dealer, Wilkinson Cameras, so it’s not a grey import and has a 2 year warranty. Sadly, not going to get much of a go with it till January as it’s a 70th birthday present for end of December. Did put it on my D7200 though and shoot some test shots at all focal lengths at f5.6 on a horrible day for photography, (dull, grey, drizzly) and am very happy with the sharpness.

Thank god that’s out of my system now, just got to get a decent 95mm UV filter and some neoprene camo (more for protection and handling than camouflage/fashion). Filter should be around £120 and I have been warned off cheap options like Polaroid.

Thanks for all the advice, everyone!
 

stevo

Well-known member
Can I make a suggestion?Don't buy any filters for the front of your lens,they degrade image quality.Your 1st line of defence is your lens hood.
 

marcsantacurz

Well-known member
I'm sure you'll enjoy the 200-500. It was a fun lens when I shot it, lots of good shots.

Yes, if you want to try to avoid lemons, buying native glass (nikon, canon, sony, fuji all make excellent lenses) is usually the way to go, though even then you can get a bad one.

That said, you might still need to AF fine tune @ 500mm if it's not as sharp as you'd like. If you're happy with the results, then you don't need it! It's just hard to get everything manufactured within such tight tolerances at those long focal lengths, and the mid-range consumer cameras won't be as tightly controlled either. If you do have focus problems with the 200-500 + d7200, you can do it yourself with some patience or if you bring the combo into your camera shop, they likely can do the service for you.

Fine tuning is different than the "bad examples" that have some deeper structural problem. Fine tuning is making micro adjustments to the AF sensor distance to balance it with the lens. "bad examples" are more serious things such as asymmetric focal plane or other pronounced distortion that cannot be fixed in the field.

Marc
 

nikonmike

Well-known member
Well that’s saved me £120 anyway!

Wonder how many of the dont use a filter will pay for the repair if you do get something on it that will not clean off.

I did have that it was i think some kind of pollen blown on, after cleaning it left a mark in the coating, obviously no effect on IQ but it annoyed me and destroyed its resale value.
 

Apodidae49

Well-known member
Wonder how many of the dont use a filter will pay for the repair if you do get something on it that will not clean off.

I did have that it was i think some kind of pollen blown on, after cleaning it left a mark in the coating, obviously no effect on IQ but it annoyed me and destroyed its resale value.

I was going to save money by buying a 95mm Polaroid UV filter as the brand has a “name” and when I mentioned it the guy in Wilkinsons he said not to do that as he’d had a guy in who had taken a 150-600 Sigma to Australia and was unhappy about the IQ and took the lens back to the shop. Removing the Polaroid UV filter solved the problem but it didn’t save his trip of a lifetime wildlife photos.

On reflection, I always put UV filters on my lenses so I suppose that, as the lens won’t be officially unveiled until New Year, paying the money for a good brand filter like a Hoya or Sigma will be okay.
 

stevo

Well-known member
Wonder how many of the dont use a filter will pay for the repair if you do get something on it that will not clean off.

I did have that it was i think some kind of pollen blown on, after cleaning it left a mark in the coating, obviously no effect on IQ but it annoyed me and destroyed its resale value.




Regular checking of your lens & you won't have a problem.In nearly 40yrs of photography i've never had a problem.Plus the way you clean the glass can lead to problems,I never clean the glass.
 

nikonmike

Well-known member
I was going to save money by buying a 95mm Polaroid UV filter as the brand has a “name” and when I mentioned it the guy in Wilkinsons he said not to do that as he’d had a guy in who had taken a 150-600 Sigma to Australia and was unhappy about the IQ and took the lens back to the shop. Removing the Polaroid UV filter solved the problem but it didn’t save his trip of a lifetime wildlife photos.

On reflection, I always put UV filters on my lenses so I suppose that, as the lens won’t be officially unveiled until New Year, paying the money for a good brand filter like a Hoya or Sigma will be okay.

Yes the problem is although known Polaroid is a none brand, they just let the name be used often on cheap crap.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top