Tamron 150 600 Vs Sigma 150 600 mm Lens Comparison

• Sharpness: Tamron seems slightly sharper at edges, especially at longer focal lengths; Sigma excels in center sharpness.
• Weight: Sigma is marginally lighter, with a detachable tripod mount for added portability.
• Stabilization: Tamron offers 4.5 stops with three modes; Sigma provides 4 stops with two modes.
• Autofocus: Both are fast, but Sigma may track moving subjects slightly better.
• Build: Both are durable with weather sealing, but Sigma’s TSC material might handle extreme conditions better.

Tamron 150 600 Vs Sigma 150 600 mm Comparison

Hey everyone, I’ve been putting the Tamron 150-600mm vs Sigma 150-600mm lenses through their paces, and I’m excited to share my thoughts with you. As a wildlife and sports photographer, I’ve used both extensively in the field, and I know how tough it can be to pick the right one. These lenses are fantastic for capturing distant subjects, but each has its own strengths. Let’s dive into the details—build quality, optics, autofocus, stabilization, and more—to help you decide which fits your photography needs best.

Comparison Table

Here’s a quick overview of the key specs for both lenses:

Feature	Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2	Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary
Focal Length	150-600mm	150-600mm
Maximum Aperture	F5-6.3	F5-6.3
Weight	1951g	1930g (with tripod socket)
Image Stabilization	VC, 4.5 stops, 3 modes	OS, 4 stops, 2 modes
Autofocus Motor	USD	HSM
Weather Sealing	Yes	Yes
Tripod Mount	Integrated, Arca-Swiss compatible	Detachable, Arca-Swiss compatible
Minimum Focus Distance	2.2m	2.8m
Maximum Magnification	1:3.9	1:4.9
Filter Size	95mm	95mm
Optical Elements	21 elements in 13 groups	20 elements in 14 groups

This table highlights similarities and differences. Now, let’s explore each aspect in depth.

Build Quality

Both lenses feel robust and ready for the field. The Tamron uses high-grade plastic with a metal mount, tipping the scales at 1951 grams. Its construction feels solid, and the weather sealing at critical points means it can handle light rain or dust, though I’d avoid heavy downpours without extra protection. The lens’s matte finish resists scratches, and the integrated tripod ring is Arca-Swiss compatible, making it a breeze to mount on a tripod.

The Sigma, weighing 1930 grams, uses Thermally Stable Composite (TSC) material, which is lightweight yet durable. Its weather sealing is also reliable, and I’ve used it in humid conditions without issues. The detachable tripod foot is a standout feature—you can remove it to shave off weight for handheld shooting, which is great for long hikes. The TSC material might give Sigma a slight edge in extreme temperatures, but both lenses have proven tough in my experience.

Optical Performance

Sharpness

Both lenses deliver impressive image quality, but their strengths differ. At 200mm, they’re neck-and-neck in sharpness when wide open, based on tests from The-Digital-Picture.com. At 300mm, Sigma pulls ahead slightly in the center, but from 400mm to 500mm, Tamron takes the lead, especially at the edges. At 600mm, Tamron’s images stay crisp across the frame, while Sigma’s edges soften a bit. For wildlife shots where every feather counts, Tamron’s edge sharpness is a plus.

Color Reproduction

Tamron produces vibrant, true-to-life colors, which I love for capturing the vivid greens of forests or the subtle hues of a bird’s plumage. Sigma leans toward warmer tones, which can add a pleasing glow to landscapes or portraits. Neither is better—it’s about your aesthetic preference. Both use advanced optics to minimize chromatic aberrations, with Tamron’s three LD (Low Dispersion) elements and Sigma’s one FLD (Fluorite Low Dispersion) and three SLD (Special Low Dispersion) elements.

Flare and Ghosting

Thanks to Tamron’s eBAND and BBAR coatings and Sigma’s Super Multi-Layer Coating, both lenses handle backlit scenes well, reducing flare and ghosting. I’ve shot into the sun with both and gotten clean, high-contrast images. Distortion and vignetting are minimal, though you might notice slight vignetting at 600mm wide open, easily corrected in post-processing.

Autofocus Capabilities

Speed and Accuracy

Autofocus is critical for fast-moving subjects, and both lenses deliver. Tamron’s USD (Ultrasonic Silent Drive) motor is fast and quiet, excelling at locking onto static subjects at long distances. I’ve nailed sharp shots of perched eagles with ease. Sigma’s HSM (Hyper Sonic Motor) is equally quick, and some tests suggest it’s slightly faster at the telephoto end, as noted in a DPReview forum. I found Sigma’s autofocus better at tracking birds in flight, likely due to its stabilization aiding focus.

Real-World Performance

For wildlife, both lenses are reliable, but their strengths shine in different scenarios. Tamron’s accuracy is great for distant, static subjects, like a deer grazing. Sigma’s tracking makes it ideal for dynamic scenes, like a cheetah sprinting. Autofocus performance can vary by camera body, so test with your setup if possible.

Image Stabilization

Stabilization is a lifesaver for handheld shooting at 600mm. Tamron’s Vibration Compensation (VC) offers up to 4.5 stops with three modes: general (Mode 1), panning (Mode 2), and static subjects (Mode 3). Mode 3 is handy for steady shots of resting animals, letting me shoot at slower shutter speeds. Sigma’s Optical Stabilizer (OS) provides up to 4 stops with two modes: general and panning. Both systems are effective, but Tamron’s extra mode and half-stop advantage give it a slight edge for versatility.

In practice, I’ve handheld both lenses at 1/60 sec and gotten sharp results, thanks to their stabilization. For panning shots, like tracking a race car, both lenses’ panning modes work well, keeping the subject sharp while blurring the background.

Weight and Portability

Weight matters when you’re lugging gear all day. Sigma’s 1930 grams (or ~1830g without the tripod foot) is slightly lighter than Tamron’s 1951 grams. The detachable tripod foot on the Sigma is a game-changer for hikers, reducing bulk during handheld shoots. Tamron’s integrated mount is sturdy but fixed, so you’re carrying the full weight. The 21-gram difference isn’t huge, but over hours in the field, Sigma’s lighter setup feels easier on the shoulders.

Both lenses are manageable with a good strap or backpack, but Sigma’s portability edge makes it my go-to for long treks. If you mostly shoot from a tripod, the weight difference is less critical.

User Experience

Handling

Both lenses are a joy to use, with smooth zoom rings and well-placed controls. Tamron’s zoom feels slightly more fluid, and the lens balances well on my camera, even during long handheld sessions. Sigma’s zoom is equally smooth, but the detachable tripod foot can snag on straps if not removed. Both have focus limiters and stabilization switches, making adjustments quick in the field.

Ergonomics

Tamron’s ergonomic design shines for extended handheld use—its weight distribution feels natural. Sigma’s versatility with the removable tripod foot is great for switching setups, but the foot can be a minor annoyance if left on during handheld shooting. Overall, both lenses are user-friendly, with Tamron feeling a bit more polished for long shoots.

Wildlife Photography

For wildlife, both lenses excel, but Tamron’s edge-to-edge sharpness and vibrant colors make it ideal for detailed shots, like a leopard’s spots. Sigma’s lighter weight and tracking prowess are perfect for mobile photographers chasing fast animals. I’ve used both in dusty savannas, and their weather sealing held up well, as noted in a Photorec.tv review.

Sports Photography

In sports, Sigma’s autofocus tracking gives it a slight advantage for capturing athletes in motion, like a soccer player sprinting. Tamron’s stabilization is great for steady shots during slower moments, like a golfer’s swing. Both handle fast-paced scenes well, but Sigma’s tracking feels more responsive.

Bird Photography

Birding demands long reach and precision. Tamron’s corner sharpness at 600mm helps capture crisp details of birds in flight, while Sigma’s lighter weight makes it easier to swing the lens around. Both are fantastic, but Tamron’s optical edge is noticeable for pixel-peepers.

Lens Hoods and Filters

Both lenses come with petal-shaped lens hoods—Tamron’s HB105 and Sigma’s LH1327-01. They’re bayonet-mounted, reversible for storage, and effective at reducing flare. I’ve shot into bright light with both and had minimal issues. Both accept 95mm filters, which are pricey due to their size. Slim or magnetic filters can help keep weight down, especially for Sigma’s lighter setup.

Compatibility with Camera Systems

Designed for full-frame cameras, both lenses work on crop-sensor bodies, boosting the effective focal length to around 225-900mm on APS-C. I’ve used them on Nikon and Canon DSLRs with no issues, and they’re compatible with mirrorless via adapters. Sigma’s autofocus may perform better on some mirrorless systems, as noted in DPReview, but test with your camera for best results.

Warranty and Customer Support

Tamron offers a generous 6-year USA limited warranty, giving peace of mind for long-term use. Sigma provides a 3-year warranty, which is solid but shorter. Both brands have strong customer service reputations, but check regional terms, as they can vary. Tamron’s longer warranty might sway you if durability is a concern.

Decision-Making: Which Lens Should You Choose?

Choosing between the Tamron 150-600mm vs Sigma 150-600mm hinges on your priorities. If you value edge-to-edge sharpness, vibrant colors, and extra stabilization modes, Tamron is likely your best bet. Its optical performance shines for critical wildlife or birding shots. If portability, lighter weight, and better tracking for moving subjects matter more, Sigma’s Contemporary model is the way to go. Its detachable tripod mount adds versatility for field work.

For wildlife photographers, Tamron’s sharpness is a boon for detailed images, while Sigma’s mobility suits those on the move. Sports shooters might lean toward Sigma for its tracking, and birders may prefer Tamron for its clarity. Both are excellent, so your shooting style will tip the scales.

Conclusion

Both the Tamron 150-600mm and Sigma 150-600mm are stellar super-telephoto zoom lenses for wildlife, sports, and birding. Tamron edges out slightly with better sharpness, vibrant colors, and more stabilization options, making it ideal for detail-oriented shooters. Sigma’s lighter weight, detachable tripod mount, and superior tracking make it perfect for mobile photographers or action shots. Your choice depends on whether you prioritize image quality or portability. Whichever you pick, you’ll have a reliable tool for capturing distant subjects. Happy shooting!

FAQ

1. What are the main differences between the Tamron 150-600mm G2 and Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary?

• Build Quality: Tamron uses high-grade plastic; Sigma’s TSC material is lightweight and durable.
• Optical Performance: Tamron is sharper at edges, with vibrant colors; Sigma excels in center sharpness with warmer tones.
• Autofocus: Tamron is accurate for static subjects; Sigma tracks moving subjects better.
• Stabilization: Tamron offers 4.5 stops with 3 modes; Sigma has 4 stops with 2 modes.
• Weight: Sigma is lighter, especially without the tripod foot.

2. Which lens is better for wildlife photography?
Tamron’s sharpness and color reproduction give it an edge for detailed wildlife shots. Sigma’s lighter weight and detachable mount are great for mobile photographers. Your preference for image quality vs. portability will decide.

3. Can these lenses be used on crop-sensor cameras?
Yes, both are full-frame lenses but work on crop-sensor cameras, offering an effective 225-900mm focal length on APS-C. They’re compatible with major brands like Nikon and Canon.

4. Do these lenses come with a tripod mount?
Yes, both include Arca-Swiss compatible tripod mounts. Tamron’s is integrated; Sigma’s is detachable for added flexibility.

5. How do the lens hoods compare?
Both have petal-shaped, bayonet-mounted hoods that reduce flare effectively. They’re reversible for storage, with no significant differences in performance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_msTFAmwWY