Posts: 25,197
Threads: 9,431
Joined: May 2025
The Nikon 200-500 5.6 is a nice lens, the Tamron 160-600mm has been been a good lens.
What attracts me to this lens you ask? Despite costing $1800 (competitors are $1200-1400) is the fact that the lens is an internal zoom. This means the length of the lens never changes unlike the Nikon or Tamron. There is not as much of a weight shift when the front element extends forward. "OK pRICE cUBE, you can't handle a little weight shift to take an itty bitty picture?" Sure, I can, but over the course of an entire soccer game, this can get affect framing and get really annoying. Now I question whether I want to buy this lens and Sony body. Just a fun lens crush for now.
Nikon 200-500 at the 200mm setting
Nikon 200-500 at the 500mm setting
More big zooms lenses that extend.
Posts: 68,334
Threads: 17,216
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
_____________________________________
I reject your reality and substitute my own!
Posts: 40,656
Threads: 1,025
Joined: May 2025
If you get a Sony body, then the choice is made. On the Nikon platform, I'd stick with the Tamron G2 action since it's easy to update the firmware and adjust it. The Sony lens would get the nod for the reasons you mention out of all three of them.
A Nikon NIKKOR Z 200-600mm Zoom Lens is on the roadmap. When it drops, it'll kick all of their butts. However, it'll cost a fortune.
Posts: 31,028
Threads: 2,688
Joined: May 2025
This reminds me that I was going to look into a 2x converter for my 300mm and 80-200mm f-mount.
Posts: 25,197
Threads: 9,431
Joined: May 2025
vision63 wrote:
If you get a Sony body, then the choice is made. On the Nikon platform, I'd stick with the Tamron G2 action since it's easy to update the firmware and adjust it. The Sony lens would get the nod for the reasons you mention out of all three of them.
A Nikon NIKKOR Z 200-600mm Zoom Lens is on the roadmap. When it drops, it'll kick all of their butts. However, it'll cost a fortune.
This doesn't definitively mean a divorce, just a thing on the side. :jest:
Nikon and Sony zoom the same direction. If this were a Canon lens, it would be a no go.
Posts: 13,814
Threads: 1,151
Joined: Jun 2025
Reputation:
0
A Nikon 200-400/4 is about the same price used as the Sony. Obviously, it stops at 400 but at f/4, it's more useful in available darkness.
Posts: 25,197
Threads: 9,431
Joined: May 2025
AllGold wrote:
A Nikon 200-400/4 is about the same price used as the Sony. Obviously, it stops at 400 but at f/4, it's more useful in available darkness.
Yes, the 200-400 is interesting. I feel like daytime soccer and lacrosse is best covered by the 200-600mm range. I used the 1.4x teleconverter with the 200-400 and it slow down the AF speed. I have no idea how it compares to the Sony 200-600 focus speed.
Posts: 10,596
Threads: 664
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
While the Sony 200-600 isn't a f/4 lens, the ISO capabilities of the Sony may negate some of the need for the lens to be faster.
Posts: 7,581
Threads: 124
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
The downside of the internal zoom, is that the 200-600mm is gigantic, which is mildly annoying for me as I try to fit it into a backpack for hiking. It also supposedly has an AF bug with certain bodies, sometimes... Thankfully, I haven't experienced that so I haven't read up on it too much, but I also haven't had as much opportunity to get out and use the lens this past year.
