Real world Sigma 50-500 vs Tamron 150-600 user feedback

Anyone have some feedback on how either shoots with overcast, typical Seattle skies? I'm planning on a trip up there and feel I need more reach then my Nikon 70-300 provides. Particularly with Orcas and Bald Eagles or other wildlife. Most likely I'll have at least a Monopod but maybe some shots will be hand held. I've tested at Tamron 150-600 and with the IS I can shoot it, maybe not all day, but it is possible to shoot on the fly. That was on a bright, clear day though.

The prices for either are pretty close, I'm selling one of my D7000s and the 18-140 to partially fund it. I realized I hardly shoot midrange and get by with a 10-24/35/70-300. The Sigma would give extra coverage if something moves in close though. The Sigma I can snag for less then $1000 used and the Tamron has a small rebate that'll make it about $1000. If it makes a difference I rarely post process, even then I don't do anything more then a 10sec fast edit. I also don't print anything big, a few 8x10s here and there. I also don't pixel peep.

Thanks in advance!

I have used both,i had the 50-500 on loan twice you have a difficult situation on your hands.

The 50-500 is a good lens,i said somewhere its better than it deserves to be be with that zoom range,the tamron in my eyes is slightly better IQ wise and locks on focus better plus 100mm longer,although the 50mm on the sigma makes it a better walk round lens and it doesn't suffer the occasional focus freeze of the tamron.
They both weigh about the same but i found the Sigma had better balance though that could easily be a personnel thing.

I wouldnt like to be the one to push you in either direction

Thanks! I guess it'll come down to the grand debate of convenience vs longer reach. Wonder if I can just rent it from somewhere in the Seattle area? Most of the shops I've seen one rent big brand lenses.

I cannot comment on the Tamron but I do have a Bigma and I have to say that I like it (a lot). The image that I have attached is straight out of the camera; via ViewNX2 - it was shot raw and all that I did to it was export as JPEG and resize to 1000 pixels on the long side. As you can see from the sky it was a typical British summer day (multiple showers) and was taken at the long end of the zoom.

I would not describe this lens as a good walkabout lens; unless you are built like a brick outhouse or like regular sessions with a Dominatrix:apologetic:! On a gripped D90, however, it does feel well balanced - I have yet to try it on my D7100. I have owned both versions of this lens, although the non OS version was only ever used on a film camera (F80). When I went to digital I figured that the stablisation would be useful; given the higher effective focal length.

Spottydumplings said:

I cannot comment on the Tamron but I do have a Bigma and I have to say that I like it (a lot). The image that I have attached is straight out of the camera; via ViewNX2 - it was shot raw and all that I did to it was export as JPEG and resize to 1000 pixels on the long side. As you can see from the sky it was a typical British summer day (multiple showers) and was taken at the long end of the zoom.

I would not describe this lens as a good walkabout lens; unless you are built like a brick outhouse or like regular sessions with a Dominatrix:apologetic:! On a gripped D90, however, it does feel well balanced - I have yet to try it on my D7100. I have owned both versions of this lens, although the non OS version was only ever used on a film camera (F80). When I went to digital I figured that the stablisation would be useful; given the higher effective focal length.

View attachment 175658

Click to expand...

great shot! That'll be similar to Seattle weather, possibly even darker skies. I think most of the time it would be in the bag, ready to go until I get on the ferry or tour boat. I may possibly carry it on short hikes to get to where eagles are. It's hard to know just how far animals will be, I suspect they will be far away most of the time, thus the need for longer reach. The wide end would be just so I could shoot something else while waiting for said beast.

Deuce808 said:

great shot! That'll be similar to Seattle weather, possibly even darker skies. I think most of the time it would be in the bag, ready to go until I get on the ferry or tour boat. I may possibly carry it on short hikes to get to where eagles are. It's hard to know just how far animals will be, I suspect they will be far away most of the time, thus the need for longer reach. The wide end would be just so I could shoot something else while waiting for said beast.

Click to expand...

Thanks. If you are going whale watching the short end could be useful anyway; if you get dolphins bow riding or if they can get the boat reasonably close to the whales. My last major trip away was a whale watching cruise but in sunnier climes (Baja) and larger species - Greys and Blues mainly - they got quite close at times.

The lens will also focus quite close in at just under 6', giving a 1:4.5 macro ratio (actually better on a DX sensor, due to the crop), so you could shoot some smaller critters or flora.

My avatar picture was also taken with this lens; handheld at 1/80th sec and 500mm.

As i said the 50-500 does seam to have a great balance,this was taken hand held @ 100th of a second @ 500mm

mikew said:

As i said the 50-500 does seam to have a great balance,this was taken hand held @ 100th of a second @ 500mm

View attachment 175681

Click to expand...

That's a clean shot! I am leaning more toward the 50-500 just for the practicality of it. If I have this guy on then I shouldn't need to be swapping lenses on the deck of a boat! I can see all the disasters happening with that scenario! I could keep the 10-24 on 1 body and this on the other and have a whole day of shooting right there! Thanks for all the input!