Nikon 200-500 or Nikon 300mm f4 pf or sigma 300mm 2.8

Tyguy35 · Jun 28, 2017

Hello, I need some help deciding between lenses to buy. I currently have the tamron 150-600 and I'm not to pleased with the sharpness. Right now I'm stuck between the Nikon 200-500mm, Nikon 300mm pf, sigma 300mm 2.8mm which I can get used for $1999 and maybe the sigma 120-300mm but doubt I can afford it in time. Any ideas or sugggestions. Anyone use these. My goal is sharpness it's most important.

Thank you.

weepete · Jun 29, 2017

Tyguy35 said:
My goal is sharpness it's most important.
Thank you.

If it's out and out sharpness you are looking for it's gotta be a prime.

But that's not the only consideration here as the primes you've listed are a lot shorter than the superzooms. Only you can decide whither you'd be better off shootng with a 300mm prime And sharpness in a final photo is not just to do with a sharp lens, there are other factors in play. Before you go spending a couple of grand on a new lens, are you sure that it's not user error? Just speaking from personal experience that most of the time with my tammy when I'm not happy with the sharpness I've simply not been close enough.

Here is a link to a comarison that I found interesting Nikon 200-500mm vs Tamron 150-600mm vs Sigma 150-600mm C

Destin · Jun 29, 2017

I have a Tamron 150-600 G2. For the first 2-3 months I was absolutely mortified at how soft the images were.

Now, it impresses the hell out of me with its sharpness.

Two things made that happen:
1.) I spend hours out in nature with the lens practicing with it. Learning to use a lens this long properly takes practice.
2.) I got the USB dock and spent some time getting the AF fine fine right at each focal length. Made a huge difference. You can also send your lens and camera to Tamron and they'll do it for you.

goooner · Jun 29, 2017

Agree with everything Destin said. I got the dock, and the Focal software, and have been good since then. I must still fine tune the lens @ infinity, but everything below infinity is fine. It's like owning a hand full of primes :1219:

Tyguy35 · Jun 29, 2017

I have the beginning of the G1 tamrons. I am plenty close to my subjects most only being 10-20ft away. Unfortunately I cannot afford a prime. The store has a used sigma 300mm 2.8 for $1999 but I am unsure on the quality. Other then that I can't afford much more then I listed. Anyone for the Nikon?

weepete · Jun 29, 2017

Could just be a bad copy then I suppose. From what I can tell from looking at comparisons there is not much in it, just mainly luck if you get a sharp copy of either one or not.

So if you want the extra 200mm get the nikon, if you want a 600mm think about the Sigma C or sport if you want weather sealed but more weight (generally considered slightly sharper too but again more cost) but if you think you don't need the extra reach get the 300mm pf. If you want ultimate sharpness and 60mm focal length there really is only one answer, but it's not going to be cheap.

gckless · Jun 29, 2017

If your goal is simply sharpness, it's probably one of the primes. With your budget I'd look at the Sigma 150-600 Sport over the Nikon 200-500. The Nikon is great, I have it, but the Sigma is better. To me though, that 2.8 will be hard to beat.

Derrel · Jun 29, 2017

I personally reallllllly want that Nikkor 300mm f/4 Phase Fresnel lens! it is sooooooo compact for a 300mm lens! It is close in size to the Canon 135mm f/2 lens, which is in no way a PITA to carry or use, so it is VERY small for a 300mm lens.

You need to decide: ultimate sharpness and overall image quality OR focal length flexibility with adequate image quality-which has long been the prime versus zoom lens dilemma. Personally, I think getting the right framing, to make "the right picture" is vastly more critical in many types of photography, so a modern zoom lens usually wins out over a prime lens, for most uses, most of the time. For me at least.

However--when the light is marginal, like indoors, or early or late in the day, the wider maximum f/stop that most primes have makes that little bit of extra difference that can or might make a big,big difference; a 300mm f/2.8 lens shot at f/2.8 is a MUCH better a low-light image maker than say an f/5.6 setting at 300mm on a slower zoom lens; sometimes, sheer shutter speed makes a big difference in what types of pictures can be made. That is whwere the 300mm f/2.8 lens, or sometimes even the 300mm f/4 lens, can be better than being stuck at f/5.6.

chuasam · Jun 30, 2017

I just about *censored* when I played with the 300mm f/4 PF
I wanted it so badly.
Ultimately I could not justify it and got the 105mm f/1.4 instead

DarkShadow · Jun 30, 2017

When I get my new Body next week going to use My Nikon AF-300mm f/4 none PF with the 1.4 TC.Still produces better IQ and sharpness then my Tamron 150-600mm but just having that extras reach of the Tamron Its been glued to the D7200 since I bought it all while a fine piece of glass is sitting In the Nikon Bag feeling guilty and its lonely. As soon as I get my D7500 thats going on it should be a killer combo. The PF is Very Nice piece of glass I would take over the other choices and trough a TC on when you need the extra reach or don't and use it as it is, should be awesome.

Peeb · Jun 30, 2017

I chose the Nikon 200-500 which was sharper than the sigma 150-600 I compared it with.

Tyguy35 · Jul 2, 2017

Ok so now I am down to the Nikon 200-500 or the sigma 120-300 with 1.4 tc. The sigma should be much sharper than the Nikon?

jaomul · Jul 3, 2017

Just beware, these long f2.8 lenses are heavy and awkward. I kind of had a 300mm f2.8 Nikon lens in my head as the ultimate goal for myself. Half an hour using a friends and no way I'd ever buy one.

I had the previous 300mm f4 and really liked it, I could imagine the newer one being great, and maybe (though I hate converters, a 1.4 tc may work well on occasion)

Back to the tamron, would it be worth while getting it looked at, I have the sigma 150-600 C and find it very sharp, much of what I read says the tamron is sharper. Granted it's not a fast aperture lens, but reach Vs weight I think it's one worth keeping even if you buy something else

Tyguy35 · Jul 3, 2017

My tamron is one of the firsts they released. I'll have to figure out where I can get it looked at. I am not to worries about weight. Majority of the time I will be on a tripod and I know exactly what I will be shooting and how far away it is. Sharpness is my number one priority. The 2.8 would really help as the sun tends to set behind the building and creates a large shadow over the birds.