Opticallimits

https://photorumors.com/2021/07/08/sigma...orts-lens/

Sports

The Tamron 150-500mm had a short half-life I reckon ...

It's surely going to be significantly bulkier (with the simple physics of 600mm f/6.3 vs. 500mm f/6.7) and therefore pricier, more so with it being a Sport line, so I guess the Tamron will still have its niche.

I don't quite understand the point of the Tamron.

The Sony 200-600mm G is faster, longer, better built, and - if you are shopping in this market - not really THAT much more expensive.
The Tamron isn't even substantially more lightweight. The only real advantage is the minimum length for transport.

The Sony is 22.6% heavier, 51.7% longer (in your bag) and 33.4% more expensive (in my country, 42.8% in USA). So it does not require that much space in your bag (often a big plus), with added savings and less weight as added bonuses. I am sure that for a portion of potential buyers, that is a reason to consider the Tamron. The Sony still is quite a bargain.

BTW, I made the decision of replace my Sigma 150-600 C (previous version) with the Sony, as soon as I have the budget - I'm not in a hurry, but having now the a6600 which is capable of BiF I think I'll be using the long tele more frequently and the fact that the Sony doesn't extend makes it much more usable.

I think if you want 500mm, you want 600mm even more ...

(07-09-2021, 11:47 AM)stoppingdown Wrote: [ -> ]BTW, I made the decision of replace my Sigma 150-600 C (previous version) with the Sony, as soon as I have the budget - I'm not in a hurry, but having now the a6600 which is capable of BiF I think I'll be using the long tele more frequently and the fact that the Sony doesn't extend makes it much more usable.

How is the Sony A6600 camera shaping up ? ....... how are you finding the AF tracking ??

I think your decision to buy the Sony 200-600mm is a good one ......... the only slight thing I have seen is focus breathing ......... at 600mm at MFD the Sony is around 350mm ....... otherwise it's a really good sharp tele-zoom especially with it's quarter turn zooming .........

(07-09-2021, 02:17 PM)davidmanze Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-09-2021, 11:47 AM)stoppingdown Wrote: [ -> ]BTW, I made the decision of replace my Sigma 150-600 C (previous version) with the Sony, as soon as I have the budget - I'm not in a hurry, but having now the a6600 which is capable of BiF I think I'll be using the long tele more frequently and the fact that the Sony doesn't extend makes it much more usable.

How is the Sony A6600 camera shaping up ? ....... how are you finding the AF tracking ??

I think your decision to buy the Sony 200-600mm is a good one ......... the only slight thing I have seen is focus breathing ......... at 600mm at MFD the Sony is around 350mm ....... otherwise it's a really good sharp tele-zoom especially with it's quarter turn zooming .........

The two lenses (Sigma 150-600mm contemporary and the Sony) are not thaaat different concerning "focus breathing"... The Sony reaches 1:5 at 2.4 meters, the Sigma 1:5 at 2.8 meters.

(07-09-2021, 01:04 PM)Klaus Wrote: [ -> ]I think if you want 500mm, you want 600mm even more ...

It's true that I often find the 100-400mm not long enough when photographing outdoors in many cases, but the problem is that there' just no upper limit to desire. 400mm translates to 520mm on my 1D and to 640mm on the 80D but even then, it's sometimes not long enough. The issue here is, I think, identifying the balance between the focal lengths you're comfortable with being limited to (say, when I'm using the 100-400, I'm not at 400mm all the time as a bird photographer probably would...), the size and the optical performance. So I guess each of these lenses has its audience, even though they're more similar than different on the face of it.

More specs:
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/leaked-s...s-fe-lens/

Quite a bit more light-weight - but then it has to compete with the Sony G. Probably more interesting in L-mount.