D7500 Which Super Tele? 150-600, 100-400 vs my 70-300 DX

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Aston Senna Junior Member • Posts: 47
Re: D7500 Which Super Tele? 150-600, 100-400 vs my 70-300 DX

CMCM wrote:

Aston Senna wrote:

cyuill2007 wrote:

I am surprised you are not entirely happy with your AF-P 70-300mm DX lens. Most owners seem to be very pleased with the lens. You could try the FX version, which is supposed to be better. I once tested a copy of the FX lens and thought it was very good, wide open, at 300mm.

That said, I wanted to upgrade my AF-S 70-300mm FX lens. I compared the AF-P 70-300mm FX, Sigma 100-400mm, and Nikon 200-500mm lenses. I wound up getting the Sigma. I ruled out the 200-500 because it was too big and heavy to be a walkaround lens for me. I found that the Sigma 100-400 wide open @ 300mm was a teeny bit better than the Nikon 70-300 was wide open @ 300mm. And it extends to a pretty good 400mm as well. It is bigger and heavier than the 70-300, but is still a very portable lens. The overall optical quality of the Sigma is very good - sharp, nice bokeh, and works well for close-up images. It is very versatile.

Oh no, I think it's a terrific lens. But over 200 it does get a little softer. I've taken a number of pictures at work with it at different focal lengths and apertures and below 200 it's a laboratory-scalpel sharp, even wide open. It's so good below 200 that at 300 it seems almost disappointing to me haha. I definitely will always keep it because for taking something small and light for moderate zooming, it's incredible.

I agree with pretty much what everyone here has said. I first had a 70-300 AFP-VR. Nice lens but I wanted longer. I rented a Tamron 150-600 G2 but couldn't locate a Sigma 150-600 to rent. I also rented the Nikon 200-500. I wasn't crazy about the images from the Tamron but loved what I got from the Nikon, great lens. BUT....I didn't like the size and weight of the Nikon (or the Tamron) and realized I wouldn't want to use it as often as I would a smaller, lighter lens. I did a series of comparisons to see how the differences were from 200mm, 300mm, 400mm and 500mm and 600 mm. Big increase from 200 to 300 and 300 to 400, whatever the reason. Not as much from 400 to 500mm and something I could crop up to from 400mm with fairly minimal cropping.

So I moved into testing the two 100-400 lenses...Tamron and Sigma, both considerably smaller and lighter than the other lenses I tried out. The Sigma I tested was sharpest at all lens positions from 100 to 400, sharp, great contrast, beautiful images and a lot of keepers. I was after shooting flying birds, and the Sigma grabbed and held focus extremely well, better than the Tamron. So I bought the Sigma and I've been extremely happy with it on my D7500. I would buy it again. I can leave it mounted on my 7500 and it fits nicely into a modest size camera bag, ready to quickly pull out and use. I don't get tired using this combo as I did with the larger lenses....with those, my arms and hands got very tired after 30-40 minutes of shooting.

I suppose I wouldn't mind owning the Nikon 200-500 as an additional telephoto for fun and for occasional use, but I use my 100-400 a LOT because it's easy to use and carry around. It's worth adding that since I got the Sigma, I have almost never used my 70-300 even though I like it and it's a great lens. I prefer the image quality I get from the Sigma.

Thank you so much for your opinion and insights. I'm going to test the 150-600 sigma this weekend at laguna seca and see how i like it. If it seems like overkill and/or not that happy with images, i'll go the 100-400 sigma route for sure

 Aston Senna's gear list:Aston Senna's gear list
Nikon D7500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon 85mm F1.8G +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow