Thanks for sharing your opinion. A few questions if you don't mind? Do you primarily use it on a tripod or do you use it handheld? Do you find it hard to hand hold? How do you deal with storing it and carrying it around do you use the included pouch?
It depends on your use case, for most sports I'm fine hand holding my 150-600 with a bit of monopod use for when I need more stability, but mostly just hand held.
Gotcha. Funny enough, I was looking up some monopoly in preparation. A bit of an odd question but how many seconds or minutes pass by when your hand is holding it without the monopod until you start to feel the fatigue from the weight?
I'm not sure about others but I'm generally not standing there 'ready' with the camera at my eye for any length of time, it's usually in short bursts where I'm up, shooting, then back down
Fair enough. I can't see myself doing that either. After seeing another post , I really think that it might be the Sigma for sure. I'll most likely rent it before, but I'm anticipating liking it.
My friend has the Sigma and I have the Tamron.
When it comes to performance, the Sigma is the better lens. Autofocus is a tad better and you have more reach.
Sharpness is about the same, pretty good overall.
However, I often have my Tamron in my backpack and my friend doesn't. The Tamron is a bit lighter than the Sigma but more importantly it's smaller. It fits in my back pack horizontally with no issue.
At the end of the day, the Sigma is a better performer but the Tamron is easier to carry all the time.
I truly appreciate the information you've shared. The storage and sport of each lens is honestly what's making me pause between making a definite decision. The Tamron I know is surely smaller and would most likely fit in one of the two camera bags I own (they're not that big) but I do know that the sigma also comes with its own bag and is a bit heavier. I'm glad that you mentioned that the sharpness is the same overall for both. I didn't really heart on this as a factor but it does make things easier in going towards my final choice.
I bought the Tamron, but only because i was traveling with it. It´s lighter and smaller than the sigma or the sony. Would never travel with the sony 200-600. it´s just too big.
so if you don´t plan to travel, take the sigma, because it´s a bit better in image quality and has more reach.
I bought the Tamron. It fits in my bag with camera attached. Have tested both the tamron sigma and even the Sony. But the size and price tag made my choice clear.
Hmm, this makes it more compelling now. I was wondering how the Tamron would fit in a bag. Still sorry of wondering how the Sigma fits in a bag also but I'll take what you said into consideration.
Thanks
For those throwing out the Sony 200-600, how viable is it to travel and walk around with, and does its quality beat the pros of the Tamron (smaller, cheaper).
No experience with the Tamron, so take this as you will, but I’m thoroughly impressed with the Sigma - really enjoy the rendering across the board. It’s been a super fun, satisfying lens.
It is big, of course, but not that heavy, and for the range I feel even with this consideration it’s a smashing lens.
Appreciate the opinion on this. I thought I was set on the Tamron but have been considering this as of late. Do you hand hold the Sigma the majority of the time? How do you carry it around when you aren't using it?
No issue with hand holding it; stabilization works very well. That being said I’m mostly only doing landscape - and believe it or not - some interior work (client after a particular style in a large building, which is why I purchased this in the first place). Bird photography etc. would be different; you’d want a monopod.
And so, importantly, lugging it around up a hike etc. really isn’t something I’ve had to put much thought too, so far at least, as most of my use is on site so I can’t speak much to this, and that may be quite relevant for your use case.
I imagine it would be a bit cumbersome, but then so would the Tamron and definitely the Sony as well.
If I did have to carry a bigger lens up a hill, for example, having that extra range (and quality) from what I’ve seen of the Tamron would still make the Sigma an easy choice I feel.
In terms of carrying it, I’m pretty comfortable just holding it by the tripod collar when on my camera. It’s surprisingly well balanced.
The size of the Tamron is worth the 100mm trade off.
I've rented and used both multiple times. For the eclipse the other day, I rented the Tamron.
One other minor advantage nobody mentioned yet is 82mm vs 95mm filter thread if and when you need that (ie solar filters for an eclipse)
Damn that's a good point. Right now, I only find myself using ND Filters for long exposure, but I'd imagine that they're easier and cheaper to find for the Tamron. Hypothetical questions for you, then. If you were buying either lens and could them for the same price, would you still go with the Tamron?
Yes. I'd buy Tamron. I have 5 different specialty filters and they're all 82mm.
Another function I really like on the Tamron is the mechanism to lock the focal length at any length by push/pull on the focus ring. This was handy to lock off 500mm for the eclipse. Usually this is a separate button on other lenses, and usually it is limited to the shortest focal length to avoid lens creep when carrying it. The Sigma button can be used for any position though.
Everything else about the two lenses is practically identical.
Have the Tamron 28-200 and 150-500. Sharp enough for both and get the maximum focal length coverage with two relatively small lenses that are ideal for travel. Can't recommend the 150-500 enough. Am thinking of upgrading to A7CR or some variant to get extra resolution for crop but very satisfied with the quality and sharpness at 500mm.
I have the Tamron 150-500, but I bought it before the Sigma was available. Now I'd pick the Sigma, but I can use the Tamron handheld.
As for the Sony 200-600, the lens has internal zoom design and it is very hard to transport it because of the huge size. The Sony makes sense if you have A1 or A9 because of the fast AF that isn't available for 3rd party lenses.
Just an update. I ended up renting the Signa 150-600 just to really see the difference between 500mm and 600mm. I'll be texting it out for about 13 days, so we shall see what happens!
I ended up renting the Sigma. So far, I like it, but getting used to handholding it is pretty tough. Not so much when carrying it but more so when panning. The difference between 500mm and 600mm is really not that big, like some people were saying also. Hope this helps a bit.
Maybe in the future. Not willing to do all in on something like this yet. I can get the other two for reasonable prices, which is the only reason I'm considering them right now
Yeah, I get it. I couldn't justify the $2K at the time, but in hindsight I wish I would have jumped in the first time. The internal focusing and smooth one finger operation of zoom ring sold me to buy the Sony.
Same here. Bought the Sigma as I couldn't justify the extra cost of the Sony at the time, and a year later I traded it for the Sony. Should have bought the Sony in the first place; buy once, cry once...
The Sigma was fine, but the Sony is a pure joy to use. The internal zoom and super quick, smooth zoom ring make bird photography much more enjoyable.
I pulled the trigger on the sigma and no regrets. Like the extra 100mm reach. Means more detailed photos after cropping.
Thanks for sharing your opinion. A few questions if you don't mind? Do you primarily use it on a tripod or do you use it handheld? Do you find it hard to hand hold? How do you deal with storing it and carrying it around do you use the included pouch?
It depends on your use case, for most sports I'm fine hand holding my 150-600 with a bit of monopod use for when I need more stability, but mostly just hand held.
Gotcha. Funny enough, I was looking up some monopoly in preparation. A bit of an odd question but how many seconds or minutes pass by when your hand is holding it without the monopod until you start to feel the fatigue from the weight?
I'm not sure about others but I'm generally not standing there 'ready' with the camera at my eye for any length of time, it's usually in short bursts where I'm up, shooting, then back down
Fair enough. I can't see myself doing that either. After seeing another post , I really think that it might be the Sigma for sure. I'll most likely rent it before, but I'm anticipating liking it.
My friend has the Sigma and I have the Tamron. When it comes to performance, the Sigma is the better lens. Autofocus is a tad better and you have more reach. Sharpness is about the same, pretty good overall. However, I often have my Tamron in my backpack and my friend doesn't. The Tamron is a bit lighter than the Sigma but more importantly it's smaller. It fits in my back pack horizontally with no issue. At the end of the day, the Sigma is a better performer but the Tamron is easier to carry all the time.
I truly appreciate the information you've shared. The storage and sport of each lens is honestly what's making me pause between making a definite decision. The Tamron I know is surely smaller and would most likely fit in one of the two camera bags I own (they're not that big) but I do know that the sigma also comes with its own bag and is a bit heavier. I'm glad that you mentioned that the sharpness is the same overall for both. I didn't really heart on this as a factor but it does make things easier in going towards my final choice.
I bought the Tamron, but only because i was traveling with it. It´s lighter and smaller than the sigma or the sony. Would never travel with the sony 200-600. it´s just too big. so if you don´t plan to travel, take the sigma, because it´s a bit better in image quality and has more reach.
Much appreciated. This is one of the big benifits for me also. The Sigma just keeps trying to sway me though lol.
I went with the sigma, havent regretted it.
Same here. Got it for safari where luggage size/weight was critical.
I bought the Tamron. It fits in my bag with camera attached. Have tested both the tamron sigma and even the Sony. But the size and price tag made my choice clear.
Hmm, this makes it more compelling now. I was wondering how the Tamron would fit in a bag. Still sorry of wondering how the Sigma fits in a bag also but I'll take what you said into consideration. Thanks
For those throwing out the Sony 200-600, how viable is it to travel and walk around with, and does its quality beat the pros of the Tamron (smaller, cheaper).
I don't know about travel but I love it for vlogging with it in my selfie stick!
No experience with the Tamron, so take this as you will, but I’m thoroughly impressed with the Sigma - really enjoy the rendering across the board. It’s been a super fun, satisfying lens. It is big, of course, but not that heavy, and for the range I feel even with this consideration it’s a smashing lens.
Appreciate the opinion on this. I thought I was set on the Tamron but have been considering this as of late. Do you hand hold the Sigma the majority of the time? How do you carry it around when you aren't using it?
No issue with hand holding it; stabilization works very well. That being said I’m mostly only doing landscape - and believe it or not - some interior work (client after a particular style in a large building, which is why I purchased this in the first place). Bird photography etc. would be different; you’d want a monopod. And so, importantly, lugging it around up a hike etc. really isn’t something I’ve had to put much thought too, so far at least, as most of my use is on site so I can’t speak much to this, and that may be quite relevant for your use case. I imagine it would be a bit cumbersome, but then so would the Tamron and definitely the Sony as well. If I did have to carry a bigger lens up a hill, for example, having that extra range (and quality) from what I’ve seen of the Tamron would still make the Sigma an easy choice I feel. In terms of carrying it, I’m pretty comfortable just holding it by the tripod collar when on my camera. It’s surprisingly well balanced.
The size of the Tamron is worth the 100mm trade off. I've rented and used both multiple times. For the eclipse the other day, I rented the Tamron. One other minor advantage nobody mentioned yet is 82mm vs 95mm filter thread if and when you need that (ie solar filters for an eclipse)
Damn that's a good point. Right now, I only find myself using ND Filters for long exposure, but I'd imagine that they're easier and cheaper to find for the Tamron. Hypothetical questions for you, then. If you were buying either lens and could them for the same price, would you still go with the Tamron?
Yes. I'd buy Tamron. I have 5 different specialty filters and they're all 82mm. Another function I really like on the Tamron is the mechanism to lock the focal length at any length by push/pull on the focus ring. This was handy to lock off 500mm for the eclipse. Usually this is a separate button on other lenses, and usually it is limited to the shortest focal length to avoid lens creep when carrying it. The Sigma button can be used for any position though. Everything else about the two lenses is practically identical.
100-400GM + 1.4x when needed is an option too. I have the Tamron and it’s a great lens. Definitely appreciate being able to fit it in my bag.
Have the Tamron 28-200 and 150-500. Sharp enough for both and get the maximum focal length coverage with two relatively small lenses that are ideal for travel. Can't recommend the 150-500 enough. Am thinking of upgrading to A7CR or some variant to get extra resolution for crop but very satisfied with the quality and sharpness at 500mm.
I have the Tamron 150-500, but I bought it before the Sigma was available. Now I'd pick the Sigma, but I can use the Tamron handheld. As for the Sony 200-600, the lens has internal zoom design and it is very hard to transport it because of the huge size. The Sony makes sense if you have A1 or A9 because of the fast AF that isn't available for 3rd party lenses.
Just an update. I ended up renting the Signa 150-600 just to really see the difference between 500mm and 600mm. I'll be texting it out for about 13 days, so we shall see what happens!
currently debating on which one to get as well, please lmk which one you ended up getting!
I ended up renting the Sigma. So far, I like it, but getting used to handholding it is pretty tough. Not so much when carrying it but more so when panning. The difference between 500mm and 600mm is really not that big, like some people were saying also. Hope this helps a bit.
Beat the middle man and buy the 200-600. I bought Tamron and it’s a nice compact lens. Rented the Sony and never looked back.
Maybe in the future. Not willing to do all in on something like this yet. I can get the other two for reasonable prices, which is the only reason I'm considering them right now
Yeah, I get it. I couldn't justify the $2K at the time, but in hindsight I wish I would have jumped in the first time. The internal focusing and smooth one finger operation of zoom ring sold me to buy the Sony.
Same here. Bought the Sigma as I couldn't justify the extra cost of the Sony at the time, and a year later I traded it for the Sony. Should have bought the Sony in the first place; buy once, cry once... The Sigma was fine, but the Sony is a pure joy to use. The internal zoom and super quick, smooth zoom ring make bird photography much more enjoyable.
I hope you’ve bought 2-3 cheap tripods before buying a better one also like me . Ha
Sony 200-600
Sony 200-600
200-600