FE 200-600mm F/5.6-6.3 G OSS, just did some Egret capture in flight and on the nest. I could not believe even with the 2X teleconverter on the bokeh bubbles in the blurred background even at 1800mm (using APS-C button). At 200 yds. zooming to a tree with many nests I got bird eye AF on a newborn egret as well a in focus mother with perfect out of focus with colorful bokeh balls in the background of limbs/leaves. I have been using the lens mainly for lunar eclipses even at 1800mm for great detail of lunar surface but found staying at 600mm to get colorful stars around it. This is using the A7RII but now with the A7RV (with lens and camera updated.
I have had the sony 2-6 for a few years now. The internal zoom is insane...and the real secret sauce of the lens. You can keep the lens on your eye...and mover from 2 to 6 or back...with a single finger...never losing sight of anything...it's almost effortless. If you like to bird...that feature alone will satisfy you beyond measure. You won't ever be able to go back to external zooms. I looked hard at the 1 to 4 lens ... I had the Sony A mount 70-400 (still do)...which is also great...but that internal zoom...game changer.
Hi Stefan. I have the tamron 150-500. I liked the compactness and weight. I did miss an important aspect which means I will be getting rid of it for the sony 200-600. I was talking pictures at an air festival over several days earlier this year and my left wrist became progressively more and more sore. After 4 days it felt like someone had been trying to cut my wrist off with a blunt saw. The problem is the stiffness of the tamron zoom, the awkward twisting motion and the long throw needed to zoom from 150-500. The pictures were great, probably the best I have ever taken of aircraft in flight but the ergonomics of the Tamron are a killer.
I went with the sigma 150-600 over the 200 600 tested both and it came down to the minimum focus distance I can go from birds on the wing tobees on flowers next to the trail
I’ve had the Tamron 150-500 and Sony 200-600, and some experience with the Sony 100-400. All did well with birds, but the Sony 200-600 worked best with my Sony A7R3. Using the crop setting on the camera worked better with the 200-600. Shooting with my Canon friends, I’ve been able to get super sharp Eagles while the Canon-Tamron setups fell short at the end or range. I got great shots with the Tamron, but the Sony 200-600 worked better with my setup. Great information! Thanks!
this was the best lens review I ever watched. I normally hate those boring nitpicking comparisons. but this was beautiful and everyone is a winner... for someone. I only had the 24-105 for filming on my Sony and thought about the sig 100-400. but now I believe to skip directly to the 150-500.
man Stefan, you nailed it on all these lenses. The only lens I haven't tried personally yet is the Sigma 60-600 but I plan to borrow one this summer for some wild life. Thanks for the topaz labs info too, I've looked at it a few times but never pulled the trigger to get it. My personal favorite is the 100-400 sony, the image quality is just really hard to beat
Great review. One place where the 100-400's are often overlooked is in landscape photography. Great IQ out of the Sony and Sigma and they weigh a bit less than those others you reviewed and easier to carry for a time.
I was just going to comment this. I just purchased the Sigma 100-400 specifically for landscape photography and size was a big consideration in this choice. The 100-400 G-Master would have been nice, but really hard to justify a more than 2x price of the Sigma.
The Tamron 150-500 is the only lens I ever want. I returned my Sony 200-600 for the Tamron. I needed to be so far away from the subject to get focus. Plus it was heavy and bulky and needed a tripod for it. Was really annoying.
Hello Stefan! I own several Tamron lenses and have recently acquired a Tamron 50-400. I’m in love! It is a bit heavy, but not like the 600’s. IQ is startlingly good. Thanks for a great review!
I wish the tamron 150-500 was more affordable that would be my pick, the longer ones are too heavy for hiking. Which one would you pick for hiking wildlife if on a budget?
I film high school track and field and have the Sony 200-600, Tamron 50-400 and the Sigma 60-600. Best range is the Sigma 60-600. Auto-focus Continuous is 100/100 on my scoreboard for the Sony 200-600 and it is almost parfocal (zooming doesn't change focus) and 98/100 on my scoreboard is the Sigma 60-600 (it's not quite parfocal but close enough). The Tamron is 75/100 in my grading at it sucks at AF-C, constantly back focusing and not focusing fast enough. Also it is clearly not parfocal at all so if you're zooming, it's constantly out of focus but when you stop zooming it's backfocusing. Worse $1300 I spent. BTW when you show up at a track meet with these lenses, it's automatic respect from everyone!
do you find the image quality of the Sigma 60-600 to be significantly worse than the 200-600 at 600mm? i'm having a hard time choosing between the two, especially if they're just about as good at the long end!
@@amarotuninetti9300 no. I think they are very very close at 600mm. I use the 60-600 90% of the time now because of the 60mm. Auto focus is just as good in video, not quite as fast in photos.
I had the 100-400 gm and the 200-600g, now I have the 50-400Tamron and I prefer this over both, the weight and size difference is huge and also the versatility with 50mm and the macro function is really fun, I can live with 15fps and slightly slower aperture.
I have the sony 100-400 and the only thing I don't like about it is that it zooms externally. Other than that is an amazing lens. I also have the 200-600 and I am in love with it. the only thing I miss, its the versatility on the wide end and that it cannot focus close up. My perfect lens would be something like the 60-600 and zoom internally like the 200-600!!!! that would be a dream come true! I hope sony is listening 😁
Thanks for another great video! I've got the 200-600 and the 50-400. I'm very happy with both lenses. I haven't used the Sony 100-400 but I have no reason to doubt it's the lens with the best IQ. But the 200-600 gives more reach and is imho the best lens of them all for birding. With a tc you get more reach than with any of the other lenses, and it's lighter (and cheaper in my country) than the Sigma 60-600. The Tamron 50-400 is a super nice lens for landscapes with its 8x zoom. And if an interesting bird flies by while you're out shooting landscapes chances are you can get a nice shot of it. It's also relatively light and compact, which makes it even more appealing for hiking or traveling. The "problem" with the Sony ecosystem today is that there are almost too many great lenses to choose from 😀
I bought the Tamron 150-500mm because it's so light and cheap. Also because it has a linear focus motors instead of stepping motors like the Sigma lenses. But in reality this lens does miss focus quite a lot if for example a dog is running towards you, or a bird... Also now that I have an A7RV I can notice it's not really that sharp of a lens. Sometimes I need the extra reach so I use crop mode and still get 26MP, but the image will be pretty soft. I've heard about that on the Sony 200-600 as well, just not that severe. Because of this I really can't wait for a Sony 200-600 mk2.
I've been waiting for a video like this for a long time. Thank you so much!! I couldn't keep track of all the different sigma and Tamron versions. Felt like there were 500 haha.
First you get what you pay for and a lens is forever!!! Before the Sony 200-600mm I had the Sigma 150-600mm C with 1.4X and 2X it was/is a great lens but for Sony camera you had to use a Canon to Sony adapter. Canon/Nikon will not AF using the 1.4x/2x I tested on my T2i but works fine on a Sony, because of going above f/8 with all, just info! BUT with adapter + 1.4x or 2x metadata was always messed up never knew mm shot at or even setting!!!! I got the Sony 200-600mm as soon as it came out it was great for lunar eclipses or just the monthly different moons/critters/birds. I just did the lens update as well as the A7RV's and now even better. Lately I found a multi Egret rookery and using just the 200-600mm I got bokeh bubbles in the background of all MM's using bird eye AF, I mean focus is so tight the background is always a blur but to get bokeh balls of leaves!!! I can go on!! This lens should be a GM with its internal focusing and short turn for zooming in and out.The best thing is price $1999 (say $2k) the same price as a A7iii and it stay there never going down year after year the same for the A7iii that is the main point constant value!!!! I suggest to get a heavy duty binocular harness for walkabout and use those red button attachment things that way it is on your chest not in your bag next camo skins for the lens for white can scare critters but also attract thieves. Lastly as mentioned here a Sony lens works better on Sony camera other lenses not so well and have not all operation available and A LENS IS FOREVER, NEVER GO LOW PRICE WHEN A FEW DOLLARS MORE GETS YOU EVERYTHING AGAIN FOREVER! Remember Sony has updates to get even better!!! Also I have the 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8 and a great lens no one ever ever mentions the 24-240mm (36-360mm in APS-C) what a range in a small package! I mean for a daily for any moment the 12-24 F/2.8 with the 24-240 in a teardrop bag talk about range and both very sharp!! Exp. an all night Milky Way night and birding in the swamp while walking back to the car, it does not get better than that!!!
I want the Tamron 50-400 as a hybrid between my everyday 28-200 and the Sony 200-600, but it's never for sale used, whereas the Sigma 100-400 can be picked up for 500$. The Tamron looks like the better lens, but it isn't twice as good. I'll most likely pick up a used Sigma.
last week i striked a great deal, got the Tamron 150-500 for 989 bucks. Didnt get to use it to its full potential yet, but first tests look very promising. AF is really snappy, sharpness is outstanding on the A7 IV, really happy with the purchase
I love the build and features of the 200-600 but gosh, that 60-600 is incredible. He Stefan, have you played around with the brand new Lightroom/ACR denoise tool? I think it is a game-changer since no 3rd-party software is needed.
I have a really hard time deciding should I get the Sony 100-400 GM or the Tamron 50-400? Price not withstanding. Agree with you that the Tamron lens is really versatile and I really like the compact size but the Sony has the faster aperture, better optical IS, teleconverter compatibility, and maybe better image quality. Also Sony might release a mark II updated version of the 100-400GM soon?
Thanks for the review. I'm am however really struggling to find any good reviews about wildlife video, especially with the Tamron and Sigma options. There is just no sample footage or real info about focus permormance and stabilization etc in video spefically which is what I do a lot more of. Would appreciate some insight into that. I will check out the individual videos in the mean time
@DigiDriftZone I didn't, just went with the Sigma 150-600 for my a6700 in the end and I am very happy. I can sufficiently handhold if I use 3 points of contact eg. On my knees, when sitting, against a tree or prone even at 600. I tent to use higher frame rates and slow down the footage as well and if you also sabilize with software you can get very good stable shots handheld. Still a tripod is best. Autofocus with the sigma works well and the new bird and animal autofocus is awesome once you figure it out. Overall very happy. Hope that helps.
@@CrazyAboutFlyFishing Thank you that helps. So do you see a drastic improvement when you turn the OSS on, on the lens, or is it quite a small improvement? - is the OSS only effective in photos or can you film smooth handheld video too? -- I had a Fuji before and the stabilisation on the Fujinon 50-230 was insanely good, switching it on felt like putting the lens on a virtual tripod, I miss that.
@DigiDriftZone I couldn't film handheld without the lens stabilization, it pretty good. Don't know how it compares to what you had but it is as good as what I had on my Panasonic 100-400 with my GH5.
I really appreciate your time and effort to review these. For me, its weight and price against whether to go with native Sony lens for optimal quality on the Sony a7Rv. I’m not professional but don’t want to under buy for my camera. Considering Tamron 50-400 (or new 50-300) and Sony 100-400.
The only of these lenses I have experiences with is the Sony 100-400 GM (I own one). I used to take pictures of birds with an a6500 and the Sony 70-350 G. Autofocus is much better with the a7iv and the 100-400 GM.
How big will be the difference between 70-350 (apsc body ; a6700) & 100-400 (ff body ; lets say a7iv , tho I'm eyeing the upcoming a7cII) in terms of zooming capabilities, picture/video quality, autofocus , stabilization, etc.
I got the Sigma 150600 after your previous video, your shots definitely sold it to me! In Japan I paid just $1150 US for the lens somehow so it was indeed a great value.
Do you shoot any sports and if so, what do you recommend? I’m coming from a Nikon with a f2.8 70-200 and I want to be able to capture the action quickly. Would love to be able to use it versatile too
The Sony 200-600mm lens is great except for its Achille's heel; the minimum focus distance at 600mm. It is, by my measurement, 17 yards. For someone who shoots small birds, such as warblers, that is a deal breaker. I got the Sigma 150-600mm after selling the Sony, and I'm getting the shots I want. For sports, safaris etc. the Sony is great. For small wildlife, nyet. I also got the Tamron 50-400mm lens for a walk-around plus wildlife lens. Very happy with it. It replaced my Sony A-Mount 70-400 G lens, which was great on my A99ii. It was very good on my A7m4 with the LAEA5 adapter, but I decided to go native. Tamron and Sigma lenses work very well on Sony E-mount and can save you enough to buy two lenses for the price of one native Sony lens.
Hello Stefan, thanks for making this video. I've had the Tamron 150-500mm for a couple of years now and I've been mostly happy with it but the weight is getting to me and it even made me consider changing to Micro Four Thirds because of it. I'm wondering if I should replace the Tamy with Sony 100-400mm and the 2x TC for birds, the weight adds up and it's not that far off from Tamy except for the extra range. I hate that Sony won't allow Teleconvertors on 3rd Party lenses because I would love the Tamy 50-400mm even if it darkens the lens significantly. I just wish I could have a birding telephoto combo under 2 KGs weight. My only option would be the a6600 or 6700 for the extra 1.5 reach.
Awesome and very informative video Stefan! What do you think about the Tamron and Sony 70-300 lenses nowadays? Do you think they're still valid choices, or do both of them get outperformed by any of the lenses you mentioned?
Great video, very helpful! Liked, subbed, and saved for future reference. Going to Alaska summer of 2024 and looking for a tele, So many choices.... I'm going to have to think about this for a while. For sure weight is a factor, probably more than $$$$.
I am trying to purchase a new set up and am torn..... I am mostly shooting wildlife (safari) and high school wrestling. in a perfect world I would want a lens that I can take photos close up and far away all in one lens (its hard for me bc I am taking small aircrafts that do not allow extra baggage so 1 camera and 1 lens). If you could only choose 1 lens to multi task both wrestling and wildlife---what would you choose?
In the UK you get 1+1 year warranty when you register your lens (or camera) with SONY. With Sigma you get 1+2 years warranty if you register your lens.
It would be great if some side-by-side are shown. Hard to tell when they are individually presented. But the 200-600 look soft, compared to others, by far the worst IQ in the bunch. I bought the Tamron 150-500mm per recommendation from a different channel. The tripod collar came free with it. But the Sony 100-400 clearly looks the sharpest.
Outstanding Video, thank you for taking your Finite time to do that Video for us BUT Why you didn't bring the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS or the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II in the comparison ??? please...
Thx for making this vid. I already got 24-70 GMII but I'm considering a second lens with longest focal length possible at a small form factor. Can't be much longer than my lens. 🤔 Cus I want something I can bring on a bike ride. And can't be too heavy. I only have room for one lens. The Tamron 70 to 300 looks interesting. So will look into other options. 🤔 I wish a 24-600mm small form factor lens existed, but that's unrealistic. 😜 But the 24-70 GMII does all I need for the most time. But a telephoto is interesting. But I can't afford the pricy GM lenses. I got all of my gear on sale and my camera and lens second hand from two different dealers. But now I see at 9:21 there's a 50-400 from Tamron. But it's still not cheap, but competive price for sure. If I find it second hand this might be nice. But the 100-400 is also interesting.
Nice review Sterfan.. There are too many telephoto lenses. That´s not a choice, is a brand war, for brand fan boys. I wish I had more affordable 70-200 2.8 OSS or more options like the Tamron 28-200, even a little more heavy, but with IS, 24-200 F4 OSS for example, Nikon have one. For me, that use the telephoto for Landscape Photography, the sigma 100-400 is ideal, so depends, not just for beginners, please, it´s great, sharp, small, lightweight... love it! P.S.: The OSS can be very helpful in very windy conditions, even on tripods.
De OM System se rumores una nueva OM-1R, "R" de RETRO, cuerpo de la EM1-Mark III, micro USB, menus antiguos de Olympus, bateria hasta 50 disparos y 20 minutos de video 1080 30fps, todo un logro con piezas del almacén heredadas de Olympus.
Hmm, my favourite is the Tamron 70-300mm (not in this review), but I wish tele lenses had better stabe/OSS on Sony. Coming from Fuji where the tele lens stabe is so much better!
can i use Topaz Labs Photo Software if i do not WANT to use adobe Light room and Photoshop ? i do not like to have have subscription software i want life time licens when i buy photo software , this why i left Adobe and im not returning as long they dont have a life time licens .
While probably not zoom enough to get into this list I actually really like the tamron 70-300 as a very light (I think 550g, 1lb ish) and very cheap (approx usd$450) option. It was the second lens I got after the standard 50 1.8 and at first I had my doubts, but for daylight it's my go to general walk around/travel lens now, especially if I'm not carrying a bag (with capture clip for heavier lenses like the 35-150). I'm coming from crop sensor so starting at 70mm isn't that bad for me. I like the weight/cost/quality compromise on this lens.
I have the 200-600 and love the lens, but not the old A7 it is attached to, really need better AF to make the most of this lens imo. But when it gives you the result you want? Awesome. I also shoot the A-mount Tamron 70-300 and it is a brilliant budget option, Macro capability is a very nice bonus on that kit and I still enjoy shooting it to this day (Owned it since 2009?)
sigh...most youtubers including this one,all test out shoot wildlife with telephoto lens,no one test with sports,hard for normal consumer to make decisions
My insights: Sony 200-600: Big and heavy, well balanced autofocus/sharpness, bad focus breathing (as per usual with Sony E mount lenses) Tamron 150-500: Sharpest lens, too short despite being 500mm, weird "back and forth" autofocus Sigma 150-600 DG DN: best looking after the Sony, worst autofocus, same price as Sony 200-600 Sony 100-400: Old and overpriced, horrible handling, obnoxious focus breathing
![ILLSLICK - KILLSHOT REMIX [FULL VERSION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RIK8RrqIAzE/mqdefault.jpg)
What's your favorite lens?
FE 200-600mm F/5.6-6.3 G OSS, just did some Egret capture in flight and on the nest. I could not believe even with the 2X teleconverter on the bokeh bubbles in the blurred background even at 1800mm (using APS-C button). At 200 yds. zooming to a tree with many nests I got bird eye AF on a newborn egret as well a in focus mother with perfect out of focus with colorful bokeh balls in the background of limbs/leaves. I have been using the lens mainly for lunar eclipses even at 1800mm for great detail of lunar surface but found staying at 600mm to get colorful stars around it. This is using the A7RII but now with the A7RV (with lens and camera updated.
I have had the sony 2-6 for a few years now. The internal zoom is insane...and the real secret sauce of the lens. You can keep the lens on your eye...and mover from 2 to 6 or back...with a single finger...never losing sight of anything...it's almost effortless. If you like to bird...that feature alone will satisfy you beyond measure. You won't ever be able to go back to external zooms. I looked hard at the 1 to 4 lens ... I had the Sony A mount 70-400 (still do)...which is also great...but that internal zoom...game changer.
Agree!
Man I loved that 70-400 on the a77ii, but I really felt like it was hold back with the adaptor when I switched to e mount
@@thatcrazydutchguy9824 Agreed. Loved it on my A77II as well. But it falls short now...mine just sits in a dry box now.
@@JACKnJESUS ever tried the 500 f8? It was such a great lens as well on the a77ii
This is how a comparison review should be done, so much good information!
Hi Stefan. I have the tamron 150-500. I liked the compactness and weight. I did miss an important aspect which means I will be getting rid of it for the sony 200-600. I was talking pictures at an air festival over several days earlier this year and my left wrist became progressively more and more sore. After 4 days it felt like someone had been trying to cut my wrist off with a blunt saw. The problem is the stiffness of the tamron zoom, the awkward twisting motion and the long throw needed to zoom from 150-500. The pictures were great, probably the best I have ever taken of aircraft in flight but the ergonomics of the Tamron are a killer.
oh boy, do you already have the 200-600? it is said to be 300mm in close up focus at 600mm
I went with the sigma 150-600 over the 200 600 tested both and it came down to the minimum focus distance I can go from birds on the wing tobees on flowers next to the trail
I’ve had the Tamron 150-500 and Sony 200-600, and some experience with the Sony 100-400. All did well with birds, but the Sony 200-600 worked best with my Sony A7R3. Using the crop setting on the camera worked better with the 200-600. Shooting with my Canon friends, I’ve been able to get super sharp Eagles while the Canon-Tamron setups fell short at the end or range. I got great shots with the Tamron, but the Sony 200-600 worked better with my setup. Great information! Thanks!
this was the best lens review I ever watched. I normally hate those boring nitpicking comparisons. but this was beautiful and everyone is a winner... for someone. I only had the 24-105 for filming on my Sony and thought about the sig 100-400. but now I believe to skip directly to the 150-500.
man Stefan, you nailed it on all these lenses. The only lens I haven't tried personally yet is the Sigma 60-600 but I plan to borrow one this summer for some wild life. Thanks for the topaz labs info too, I've looked at it a few times but never pulled the trigger to get it. My personal favorite is the 100-400 sony, the image quality is just really hard to beat
Thanks my friend! Topaz is a game changer for wildlife and birds. I've even used it on old family photos and saved them!
Great review. One place where the 100-400's are often overlooked is in landscape photography. Great IQ out of the Sony and Sigma and they weigh a bit less than those others you reviewed and easier to carry for a time.
I was just going to comment this. I just purchased the Sigma 100-400 specifically for landscape photography and size was a big consideration in this choice. The 100-400 G-Master would have been nice, but really hard to justify a more than 2x price of the Sigma.
The Tamron 150-500 is the only lens I ever want. I returned my Sony 200-600 for the Tamron. I needed to be so far away from the subject to get focus. Plus it was heavy and bulky and needed a tripod for it. Was really annoying.
I like my Sony 100-400 GM. the only things I'd change are adding a full time DMF and shortening the zoom throw.
Hello Stefan! I own several Tamron lenses and have recently acquired a Tamron 50-400. I’m in love! It is a bit heavy, but not like the 600’s. IQ is startlingly good. Thanks for a great review!
Great to hear!
Oh, the joy of watching lens comparison videos and thinking "I just want them all!"
Anybody figure out the code for infinite money yet?
AI is working on it.
Is the Tamron 50-400 better than the sigma 10-400 in autofocus?
I wish the tamron 150-500 was more affordable that would be my pick, the longer ones are too heavy for hiking.
Which one would you pick for hiking wildlife if on a budget?
I film high school track and field and have the Sony 200-600, Tamron 50-400 and the Sigma 60-600. Best range is the Sigma 60-600. Auto-focus Continuous is 100/100 on my scoreboard for the Sony 200-600 and it is almost parfocal (zooming doesn't change focus) and 98/100 on my scoreboard is the Sigma 60-600 (it's not quite parfocal but close enough). The Tamron is 75/100 in my grading at it sucks at AF-C, constantly back focusing and not focusing fast enough. Also it is clearly not parfocal at all so if you're zooming, it's constantly out of focus but when you stop zooming it's backfocusing. Worse $1300 I spent.
BTW when you show up at a track meet with these lenses, it's automatic respect from everyone!
do you find the image quality of the Sigma 60-600 to be significantly worse than the 200-600 at 600mm? i'm having a hard time choosing between the two, especially if they're just about as good at the long end!
@@amarotuninetti9300 no. I think they are very very close at 600mm. I use the 60-600 90% of the time now because of the 60mm. Auto focus is just as good in video, not quite as fast in photos.
@@pomanprod thanks! that's incredible and probably sways me to the 60-600 for the versatility and min focusing distance
My favorite go to is the Sony 100-400 mm Love it.
I had the 100-400 gm and the 200-600g, now I have the 50-400Tamron and I prefer this over both, the weight and size difference is huge and also the versatility with 50mm and the macro function is really fun, I can live with 15fps and slightly slower aperture.
I have the sony 100-400 and the only thing I don't like about it is that it zooms externally. Other than that is an amazing lens. I also have the 200-600 and I am in love with it. the only thing I miss, its the versatility on the wide end and that it cannot focus close up. My perfect lens would be something like the 60-600 and zoom internally like the 200-600!!!! that would be a dream come true! I hope sony is listening 😁
We can dream!
Thanks for another great video! I've got the 200-600 and the 50-400. I'm very happy with both lenses. I haven't used the Sony 100-400 but I have no reason to doubt it's the lens with the best IQ. But the 200-600 gives more reach and is imho the best lens of them all for birding. With a tc you get more reach than with any of the other lenses, and it's lighter (and cheaper in my country) than the Sigma 60-600. The Tamron 50-400 is a super nice lens for landscapes with its 8x zoom. And if an interesting bird flies by while you're out shooting landscapes chances are you can get a nice shot of it. It's also relatively light and compact, which makes it even more appealing for hiking or traveling. The "problem" with the Sony ecosystem today is that there are almost too many great lenses to choose from 😀
This video helps a lot for people who are looking for a tele lens.... it's KIV for so long to decide on which lens to purchase
Liked the review. But when you're hiking for days or on long hikes, weight is the big differentiator. So I stick with Sigma.
I bought the Tamron 150-500mm because it's so light and cheap. Also because it has a linear focus motors instead of stepping motors like the Sigma lenses. But in reality this lens does miss focus quite a lot if for example a dog is running towards you, or a bird... Also now that I have an A7RV I can notice it's not really that sharp of a lens. Sometimes I need the extra reach so I use crop mode and still get 26MP, but the image will be pretty soft. I've heard about that on the Sony 200-600 as well, just not that severe. Because of this I really can't wait for a Sony 200-600 mk2.
Thanks you for a fee video and the thank you for putting the weight in gram. Many forgotten that the majority use that system. Awesome work
I've been waiting for a video like this for a long time. Thank you so much!! I couldn't keep track of all the different sigma and Tamron versions. Felt like there were 500 haha.
First you get what you pay for and a lens is forever!!! Before the Sony 200-600mm I had the Sigma 150-600mm C with 1.4X and 2X it was/is a great lens but for Sony camera you had to use a Canon to Sony adapter. Canon/Nikon will not AF using the 1.4x/2x I tested on my T2i but works fine on a Sony, because of going above f/8 with all, just info! BUT with adapter + 1.4x or 2x metadata was always messed up never knew mm shot at or even setting!!!! I got the Sony 200-600mm as soon as it came out it was great for lunar eclipses or just the monthly different moons/critters/birds. I just did the lens update as well as the A7RV's and now even better. Lately I found a multi Egret rookery and using just the 200-600mm I got bokeh bubbles in the background of all MM's using bird eye AF, I mean focus is so tight the background is always a blur but to get bokeh balls of leaves!!! I can go on!! This lens should be a GM with its internal focusing and short turn for zooming in and out.The best thing is price $1999 (say $2k) the same price as a A7iii and it stay there never going down year after year the same for the A7iii that is the main point constant value!!!! I suggest to get a heavy duty binocular harness for walkabout and use those red button attachment things that way it is on your chest not in your bag next camo skins for the lens for white can scare critters but also attract thieves. Lastly as mentioned here a Sony lens works better on Sony camera other lenses not so well and have not all operation available and A LENS IS FOREVER, NEVER GO LOW PRICE WHEN A FEW DOLLARS MORE GETS YOU EVERYTHING AGAIN FOREVER! Remember Sony has updates to get even better!!! Also I have the 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8 and a great lens no one ever ever mentions the 24-240mm (36-360mm in APS-C) what a range in a small package! I mean for a daily for any moment the 12-24 F/2.8 with the 24-240 in a teardrop bag talk about range and both very sharp!! Exp. an all night Milky Way night and birding in the swamp while walking back to the car, it does not get better than that!!!
Would like to see you review the Sigma 500 f/5.6.
I want the Tamron 50-400 as a hybrid between my everyday 28-200 and the Sony 200-600, but it's never for sale used, whereas the Sigma 100-400 can be picked up for 500$. The Tamron looks like the better lens, but it isn't twice as good. I'll most likely pick up a used Sigma.
Great comparison, thanks for taking the time to do it!!
Appreciate that! These ones take a looooong time 👊
Amazing comparison and photos! Thanks a lot Stefan. You're the best thing since sliced bread🍞
last week i striked a great deal, got the Tamron 150-500 for 989 bucks. Didnt get to use it to its full potential yet, but first tests look very promising. AF is really snappy, sharpness is outstanding on the A7 IV, really happy with the purchase
I love the build and features of the 200-600 but gosh, that 60-600 is incredible. He Stefan, have you played around with the brand new Lightroom/ACR denoise tool? I think it is a game-changer since no 3rd-party software is needed.
I have a really hard time deciding should I get the Sony 100-400 GM or the Tamron 50-400? Price not withstanding. Agree with you that the Tamron lens is really versatile and I really like the compact size but the Sony has the faster aperture, better optical IS, teleconverter compatibility, and maybe better image quality. Also Sony might release a mark II updated version of the 100-400GM soon?
What are the professional telephoto lenses for sony ????❤❤❤❤❤
Thank you, great reviews, subscribed.
Welcome!
Pro review. Enlightening. Thanks. Where would you put the Sony 70-350 APSC? Bestest.
Thanks for the review. I'm am however really struggling to find any good reviews about wildlife video, especially with the Tamron and Sigma options. There is just no sample footage or real info about focus permormance and stabilization etc in video spefically which is what I do a lot more of. Would appreciate some insight into that. I will check out the individual videos in the mean time
Did you find an answer to this? - I am looking for what tele zoom lens has the best stabilisation for video.
@DigiDriftZone I didn't, just went with the Sigma 150-600 for my a6700 in the end and I am very happy. I can sufficiently handhold if I use 3 points of contact eg. On my knees, when sitting, against a tree or prone even at 600. I tent to use higher frame rates and slow down the footage as well and if you also sabilize with software you can get very good stable shots handheld. Still a tripod is best. Autofocus with the sigma works well and the new bird and animal autofocus is awesome once you figure it out. Overall very happy. Hope that helps.
@@CrazyAboutFlyFishing Thank you that helps. So do you see a drastic improvement when you turn the OSS on, on the lens, or is it quite a small improvement? - is the OSS only effective in photos or can you film smooth handheld video too? -- I had a Fuji before and the stabilisation on the Fujinon 50-230 was insanely good, switching it on felt like putting the lens on a virtual tripod, I miss that.
@DigiDriftZone I couldn't film handheld without the lens stabilization, it pretty good. Don't know how it compares to what you had but it is as good as what I had on my Panasonic 100-400 with my GH5.
I really appreciate your time and effort to review these. For me, its weight and price against whether to go with native Sony lens for optimal quality on the Sony a7Rv. I’m not professional but don’t want to under buy for my camera. Considering Tamron 50-400 (or new 50-300) and Sony 100-400.
Hi Stefan! Do you have a recommendation for APSC users? I've got the a6400 and looking for a travel telephoto 😊
I could put something together.
The only of these lenses I have experiences with is the Sony 100-400 GM (I own one).
I used to take pictures of birds with an a6500 and the Sony 70-350 G. Autofocus is much better with the a7iv and the 100-400 GM.
Great choice! Hoping for the mark 2!
How big will be the difference between 70-350 (apsc body ; a6700) & 100-400 (ff body ; lets say a7iv , tho I'm eyeing the upcoming a7cII) in terms of zooming capabilities, picture/video quality, autofocus , stabilization, etc.
@@gnb_ I am not sure. a6700 have much better autofocus than a6500. Whether 70-350 is as good as 100-400 In autofocus I don't know.
@@TVe200 how about the IQ of the。both two lens？
I got the Sigma 150600 after your previous video, your shots definitely sold it to me! In Japan I paid just $1150 US for the lens somehow so it was indeed a great value.
Great choice!
Do you shoot any sports and if so, what do you recommend? I’m coming from a Nikon with a f2.8 70-200 and I want to be able to capture the action quickly. Would love to be able to use it versatile too
Very informative and your photos are nice too.
Appreciate it!
Are you usually use the CPL filter with the 100-400 ?
No never.
The Sony 200-600mm lens is great except for its Achille's heel; the minimum focus distance at 600mm. It is, by my measurement, 17 yards. For someone who shoots small birds, such as warblers, that is a deal breaker. I got the Sigma 150-600mm after selling the Sony, and I'm getting the shots I want. For sports, safaris etc. the Sony is great. For small wildlife, nyet.
I also got the Tamron 50-400mm lens for a walk-around plus wildlife lens. Very happy with it. It replaced my Sony A-Mount 70-400 G lens, which was great on my A99ii. It was very good on my A7m4 with the LAEA5 adapter, but I decided to go native.
Tamron and Sigma lenses work very well on Sony E-mount and can save you enough to buy two lenses for the price of one native Sony lens.
Had same feeling, 200-600 is really nice lens, but that minimum focus distance made me want to sell it, now using tamron 150-500 a lot more often.
Does adding a 1.4 TC improve the minimum focus distance of the 200-600m
? @@PatrickWithCamera
@@anulearntech Yes, magnification ratio is better, from 0.2x to 0.28x
@@PatrickWithCamera yes, but the minimum focus distance is unaffected I suppose. The TC just makes the 1.4x crop and has it expanded to full frame.
@@anulearntech yes, minimum focus distance is same
Hello Stefan, thanks for making this video. I've had the Tamron 150-500mm for a couple of years now and I've been mostly happy with it but the weight is getting to me and it even made me consider changing to Micro Four Thirds because of it. I'm wondering if I should replace the Tamy with Sony 100-400mm and the 2x TC for birds, the weight adds up and it's not that far off from Tamy except for the extra range. I hate that Sony won't allow Teleconvertors on 3rd Party lenses because I would love the Tamy 50-400mm even if it darkens the lens significantly. I just wish I could have a birding telephoto combo under 2 KGs weight. My only option would be the a6600 or 6700 for the extra 1.5 reach.
Awesome and very informative video Stefan! What do you think about the Tamron and Sony 70-300 lenses nowadays? Do you think they're still valid choices, or do both of them get outperformed by any of the lenses you mentioned?
Had the Tamron 150-500 but ended up selling it for the sigma 100-400. The sigma was way sharper in my tests for less weight and money
How autofocus comparing to 150-500?
@@Patrick-vi9xr didn't notice any difference
Great video, very helpful! Liked, subbed, and saved for future reference. Going to Alaska summer of 2024 and looking for a tele, So many choices.... I'm going to have to think about this for a while. For sure weight is a factor, probably more than $$$$.
Sony is 4 years warranty in Switzerland 😊
And the most expensive here is the sigma 60-600 around 2.6k and Sony 100-400 you can get under 2k 😮
Nice to have that 4 years!
I am trying to purchase a new set up and am torn..... I am mostly shooting wildlife (safari) and high school wrestling. in a perfect world I would want a lens that I can take photos close up and far away all in one lens (its hard for me bc I am taking small aircrafts that do not allow extra baggage so 1 camera and 1 lens). If you could only choose 1 lens to multi task both wrestling and wildlife---what would you choose?
In the UK you get 1+1 year warranty when you register your lens (or camera) with SONY. With Sigma you get 1+2 years warranty if you register your lens.
It would be great if some side-by-side are shown. Hard to tell when they are individually presented. But the 200-600 look soft, compared to others, by far the worst IQ in the bunch. I bought the Tamron 150-500mm per recommendation from a different channel. The tripod collar came free with it. But the Sony 100-400 clearly looks the sharpest.
Always appreciate you making these comparison videos, Stefan! Thanks so much!
Happy to help! Thanks for watching
6:51 ❤❤❤❤❤
Outstanding Video, thank you for taking your Finite time to do that Video for us BUT Why you didn't bring the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS or the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II in the comparison ??? please...
You bet! They are in a different class and with all the 70-200ish options the video would have been very long.
@@StefanMalloch true 👍
I have the sigma 100-400 but I need more length for birds, so the 150-600 might be the one I end up with
600 is also too short, unless you are crocodile dundee and can tame the wild animals.
Thx for making this vid.
I already got 24-70 GMII but I'm considering a second lens with longest focal length possible at a small form factor. Can't be much longer than my lens. 🤔 Cus I want something I can bring on a bike ride. And can't be too heavy. I only have room for one lens. The Tamron 70 to 300 looks interesting. So will look into other options. 🤔 I wish a 24-600mm small form factor lens existed, but that's unrealistic. 😜 But the 24-70 GMII does all I need for the most time. But a telephoto is interesting. But I can't afford the pricy GM lenses. I got all of my gear on sale and my camera and lens second hand from two different dealers. But now I see at 9:21 there's a 50-400 from Tamron. But it's still not cheap, but competive price for sure. If I find it second hand this might be nice. But the 100-400 is also interesting.
Love my Tamron 50-400! Also where is your hat from? 🧢
Well done excellent dense review. 🎉
Nice review Sterfan.. There are too many telephoto lenses. That´s not a choice, is a brand war, for brand fan boys. I wish I had more affordable 70-200 2.8 OSS or more options like the Tamron 28-200, even a little more heavy, but with IS, 24-200 F4 OSS for example, Nikon have one. For me, that use the telephoto for Landscape Photography, the sigma 100-400 is ideal, so depends, not just for beginners, please, it´s great, sharp, small, lightweight... love it! P.S.: The OSS can be very helpful in very windy conditions, even on tripods.
I dont hear this issue for Z or RF lenses, its like they are stuck with communism but cant complain
@@godsinbox 🤣🤣🤣
Hi, Stefan.
Can you demo us how to use Topaz Al ?
For sure. Review coming
De OM System se rumores una nueva OM-1R, "R" de RETRO, cuerpo de la EM1-Mark III, micro USB, menus antiguos de Olympus, bateria hasta 50 disparos y 20 minutos de video 1080 30fps, todo un logro con piezas del almacén heredadas de Olympus.
Hmm, my favourite is the Tamron 70-300mm (not in this review), but I wish tele lenses had better stabe/OSS on Sony. Coming from Fuji where the tele lens stabe is so much better!
Hopefully 50-400 gets a firmware update on VC, which is the only downside of this lens.
I think its more of a size and what you can fit in type of issue. Smaller lens trade off.
@@StefanMalloch I see better stabilization in old DSLR kit lens. Plus there are two vc modes which suggest update potential.
Hopefully Sony makes 200-400 F4. Something in a budget for Sports Photographers.
Maybe 100-400 would be the only lens as of now. 😑
Should include the sigma 150-600C instead of the Sports version in the comparision. It's much lighter and cheaper and more meaningful.
There is no mirrorless C version for Sony. I don't recommend adapting lenses so it wouldn't be a comparison I would do.
Very good looking😍❤
can i use Topaz Labs Photo Software if i do not WANT to use adobe Light room and Photoshop ?
i do not like to have have subscription software i want life time licens when i buy photo software ,
this why i left Adobe and im not returning as long they dont have a life time licens .
Its not a photo editing software. It enhances images. For best results, you'll need an editor before and after throwing it into topaz.
While probably not zoom enough to get into this list I actually really like the tamron 70-300 as a very light (I think 550g, 1lb ish) and very cheap (approx usd$450) option. It was the second lens I got after the standard 50 1.8 and at first I had my doubts, but for daylight it's my go to general walk around/travel lens now, especially if I'm not carrying a bag (with capture clip for heavier lenses like the 35-150). I'm coming from crop sensor so starting at 70mm isn't that bad for me. I like the weight/cost/quality compromise on this lens.
I have the 200-600 and love the lens, but not the old A7 it is attached to, really need better AF to make the most of this lens imo. But when it gives you the result you want? Awesome. I also shoot the A-mount Tamron 70-300 and it is a brilliant budget option, Macro capability is a very nice bonus on that kit and I still enjoy shooting it to this day (Owned it since 2009?)
ON1 Photo Raw is another great denoise solution. And alot cheaper.
Thank you
Great video, thank you!
the moon is the best way to see how good is the zoom
and lens...)
sigh...most youtubers including this one,all test out shoot wildlife with telephoto lens,no one test with sports,hard for normal consumer to make decisions
Very few people do sports photography and if it works for wildlife it should work for sports as they are very similar :p
Normal consumers don't use telephoto lenses
@@bencarpenter6127 not really, a 200-600mm will work for football but not volleyball, specially if used on an APS-C camera
awesome video!
I have a buddy of mine willing to sell me his sony 100-400 with 1.4 teleconverter. Is it still a buy? He wants 1600 for it.
Did you jump at that deal?
Thanks for doing!
Choice is easy if you have a lot a of money or earn a living in photography - not easy.
Cool 🤝😎
what about the 600GM ?
Its $13,000 USD and didn't make sense to compare with lenses on this list.
My insights:
Sony 200-600: Big and heavy, well balanced autofocus/sharpness, bad focus breathing (as per usual with Sony E mount lenses)
Tamron 150-500: Sharpest lens, too short despite being 500mm, weird "back and forth" autofocus
Sigma 150-600 DG DN: best looking after the Sony, worst autofocus, same price as Sony 200-600
Sony 100-400: Old and overpriced, horrible handling, obnoxious focus breathing
Love your content but man your ranking is literally most expensive to the least 😂
😍😍😍😍😍😍
TL;DR : If you wanna super telephoto, dont bother with Sony and buy Micro43 + lens for a cheaper price than FF lens only.
Anyone here interested in buying my tamron 50-400 looking to buy sigma 60-600
Price?
wow, I've owned half this list and sold them.
I've also lost a lot of money on this hobby.
70-300 vergessen ! 😮
These are zoom lenses not tele
eeeh they are both? they are tele zooms
55 mm Zeiss
Great lens but not a telephoto
Tamron designed half of Sony glass.
I just can't stand all these jump cuts. Probably good content but can't watch anymore.
What the f are you talking about. Sony x2 and 1,4x zoom comverters can be used with any E lens