Nikon 200-500 or stay with Sigma 150-500

PolishX

Senior Member
You can see by my signature what I am using for a body set up. I'm just curious if going to a slightly longer on the bottom end Nikon with a little better f stop low wend would be worth the money. I mostly shoot birds and sports. Considered picking up a used 500 mm from B&H but Im worried. This would be the first bvery high ticket glass I have ever had. So if you had say $2500 to spend on a lens for what I need what would your suggestions be ?
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
You can see by my signature what I am using for a body set up. I'm just curious if going to a slightly longer on the bottom end Nikon with a little better f stop low wend would be worth the money. I mostly shoot birds and sports. Considered picking up a used 500 mm from B&H but Im worried. This would be the first bvery high ticket glass I have ever had. So if you had say $2500 to spend on a lens for what I need what would your suggestions be ?

Can you list the info from your signature? I believe there is a minimum number of posts required before your signature will be displayed. We could use a little more info. :)
 

PolishX

Senior Member
Nikon D-610 , Sigma DG 150-500 f5-6.3 APO HSM, Nikon AF-S 24-85 f 3.5-4.5G, Nikon 60 mm (micro) f2.8,

apparently It won't let me save my signature block
 
Last edited:

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
The Nikon glass should be superior especially when it comes to sharpness. Plus it is a constant aperture at f/5.6 no matter your focal length. But here are a couple more questions for you:

  • How often do you find yourself wishing you had a longer reach than your current 500mm?
  • How often do you use the 150mm-200mm range because if you go with a Nikon zoom, you will be giving up that range?
If you go with the Nikon, you might be able to use a 1.4x teleconverter for additional reach when needed according to a couple articles I just read.
 

Bengan

Senior Member
It will also be a matter of budget. The Nikon 200-500 is a much better lens with better IQ, image stabilization and AF. In addition the excellent 1.4X TC will give you 200 mm extra reach.
It is good for outdoor sports, but I would probably use a 70-200 for indoor sports. I bought a Tamron 70-210/f4 for those kind of shots and concerts.
If your budget is $2500, you could get either the Nikon 200-500 with the 1.4x TC or the 200-500 and a Tamron 70-210/f4.
 

Whiskeyman

Senior Member
Were it me looking to spend up to $2500 on a lens, and already owning one that could reach out to 600 mm, I'd purchase the the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR. It is priced at about $2150 at reputable outlets right now. If you want to purchase a used model, the previous model of this lens is available used for significantly less, and as of this moment, is available as a refurbished option on Nikon's web site for about $1100.

WM
 

Woodyg3

Senior Member
Contributor
The 150-500 Sigma is getting long in the tooth, and it's not the same as the Sigma 150-600 models that people here are confusing it with. The Nikon 200-500 is the best long zoom on the market, IMO. To get better image quality, you need to go with a prime. Mine is on my D500 all the time.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
I have the Nikkor 200-500 and it's almost permanently on my D7200. I find this combination exceptional and I have been getting above average results at full 5.6 aperture. I would not hesitate to highly recommend it.
 

PolishX

Senior Member
Im thinking the 200-500 might be the way to go, I seldom find myself needing less lens and I a fast prime is usually too expensive. Although B&H did have a deal on a used older 500 mm f4 . I should pick up the 200-500 5.6E at the end of June, just hope its as good or better than why older Sigma
 

PolishX

Senior Member
Found a 200-500 locally with the deal Nikon has on right now and no sales tax Im at just over $1200 for the lens. I just sold my Sigma 150-600 for $500, Im not worried about being longer on the low end. Just thinking a new Nikon lens will be sharper and better than the older sigma I had which was fine but birding is really pushing me to new lenses. Think I can get by with a 24-70 for a walk around lens for the most part
 
Top