Sony 200-600G vs Tamron 150-500 VXD: Which to Buy?

=============================
Table of Contents:
=============================
0:00​ - Intro
1:56 - Tamron advantages
6:31 Sony Advantages
10:54 Conclusion
---------------------------------------------------------

Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at:

DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Keywords: Tamron 150-500, Tamron 150-500mm, Tamron 150-500 VXD, Tamron 150-500 Review, Tamron 150-500mm Review, Di III, VC, VXD, A057, Tamron 150-500 VC Review, Sony 200-600, Sony 200-600mm, Sigma 100-400mm, Sigma 100-400, Review, Telephoto, Action, Tracking, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a9, sony a7III, sony a7RIV, a9II, Sony Alpha 1, Sony A1

[PatrickWithCamera]

After two years of using 150-500 and a year for 200-600 with a6600, now a6700 I finally decided to keep 150-500 and sell 200-600.
Firstly because AF difference is much smaller between them on a6700 than on a6600. Another reasons are transport ease, slighly weight savings and macro capabilities, with crop factor I could do really nice close ups, impossible to achieve even with dedicated macro because of great working distance.
Only thing I dislike about tamron 150-500 is that I wish it were native aps-c with even more weight/size savings, would insta buy such version. Another thing I dislike that after 2 years I've got 1 dust particle behind front glass, it doesn't affect image at all, even with aperture closed to maximum, but still it kills my soul inside :D

[davidburton]

I owned the Sigma 150-600mm for Sony Fe on the A7rii. Incredibly sharp but big and rarely needed more than 500mm. The zoom ring had a long throw and I found I would miss shots when a bird flew at me. I sold it now and am thinking about the Tamron. Another great review!

[pul.f]

Yass finally. Was sooo intensively waiting for this comparison !👏🤯

[devondesroches]

Dustin, thanks for the comparison. I recently tried a buddy’s A1 and 200/600. I’m an R5/100-500 shooter, so something more akin to the Tamron. I will say that if you’re a bird in flight shooter, the quality of life that comes with an internal zoom with a short throw can’t be understated. If you’re looking at these two lenses and need to follow erratic subjects that vary their distance (birds in flight), the value of the internal zoom is tremendous in my experience.

If you’re shooting subjects where you can “set and shoot, ” I think the Tamron is going to be a better value overall, action body or not. It’s 15 vs 20 FPS on the A9 bodies, and anyone with the cash for an A1 isn’t going to have trouble justifying the additional $600 for the 200-600. -I believe Mark Galer also mentioned that in order to get the 30 FPS, you have to change your priority set in AF-C to “Release” instead of “Balanced Emphasis” or “AF” - so you may have one more setting to juggle while using the lens.-

Either way, they’re both fantastic lenses from the looks of it.

[vanjasimunko]

Love my 200-600 which I got swapping my 100-400GM for it. Read and watched your definitive reviews of the both and realized I should get 200-600 for what I use it, and that is when I need range. And I don’t regret doing it one bit. It is a fantastic lens that gets me much more range than 100-400 did and the zoom action is just amazing, how you say, one finger zoom and in less than quarter of a turn.
Tamron looks interesting but I already have the Sony and see no reason to let it go for Tamron. But still love watching your reviews and going into every single detail that could distinguish them.

[colliescameraaction]

I'm loving the internal zoom and the short throw on the zoom ring of the Sony - it makes it really quick to adjust composition, and more importantly, find the subject quickly as you can start at 200mm and then get to 600mm with such a short turn of the zoom ring. The build quality and image quality are excellent - it's probably the best value native lens out there for Sony. My only nitpick is the tripod foot not being arca swiss

[lafonevc]

Have both because they are useful in different conditions. The 200-600 is great for places where the internal zoom and short reach can take advantage of the frames per second on the A9 - so sport, fast action wildlife etc.

However it is very weighty and harder to hand hold for any length of time. It's good on a tripod but I don't take a tripod everywhere.

So the 150-500 is great for more static subjects where I want a bit more reach than the 100-400 I can also use, and don't mind about the frame rate.

If I had to choose I'd have the 200-600 and the Sony 100-400 as they both support faster frame rates, but adding the 150-500 gives more flexibility, it's just easier to carry round all day on wildlife park, nature reserve sort of trips.

In terms of image quality the Tamron shoots great pictures so it's really all about size and heft for the conditions. What is great is having so much variety to choose from in longer lenses.

I did have the Sigma 150-600 DN Sports before the Sony 200-600 and hated the balance and the weird weight distribution, image quality was ok but the fps limit was not good for what I want to shoot and the pump zoom makes it hard to use with an all weather cover for rainy days..traded that for the 200-600 and it's much better, easier to handle, better balance, faster frame rates and great sharpness.

The Tamron has a different set of use cases for me so complements the 200-600 and 100-400 nicely.

[nosignal]

I'm glad Tamron gave it the VXD motor. After doing some research I understood VXD is actually the same electromagnetic rails type of motor you find inside the expensive 400 and 600mm GM lenses. In contrast to RXD which is a traditional Stepper motor(albeit a really good and silent one). So that speak to the quality of the components Tamron has put into it, which is very appealing to me.
On the other hand, I also understand the appeal of the Sony G lens. That large metal barrel is solid and internally zooming/focusing, which is a rarity in this market. But I feel like this solution is always asking me to pay just a little bit more. Pay just a little bit more and I get high quality 600mm reach. Pay just a little bit more and I get high quality teleconverters. Pay just a little bit more and I get a high framerate A1. All that added up means I would be spending too much. So I have decided to save some money with the Tamron.
Both are fantastic and adds a rich diversity to the E-mount though, so I'm happy we have both choices.

[petripuurunen]

Sony 200-600 is excellent but compact Tamron has some advantages also. Nice review!

[TheIdMan]

I've been shooting sports (mainly disc golf) with a Sony RX10M4 for the last 18 months and finally pulled the trigger on an A9. I do occasional birding if I see something interesting during an event but no one is paying me enough just yet to spring for the big Sony glass. I'm starting off with the Tamron 70-180 2.8. I think this will be my second lens for sunny days because it can get a little dark back in the woods some times. Super excited to finally make the jump to full frame, and hoping to make a name for myself and a career doing what I love. Thanks for this video.

[Rascallucci]

Sony all day. The short and ultra smooth throw of an internal zoom is the way to go for birding especially for BIF shots.

[tommytexter]

I rented the 200-600 for the last weekend. Introduced me to the full frame telephoto zoom. Real good, but it is too damn heavy and expensive for me. I think i will just spend half the price to get 80% of the feature of Sony G on Tamron.

[jackyhui]

what about the sigma 100-400 vs the tamron?

[dudeiusmannigast]

I been looking for a video like this all day 🙌🙌😄 thanks so much 👍👍👍

[sandboxaperture]

I'm surprised there was no mention of image quality between the two (unless I missed it). Are they just that close in image quality?

[hannahdobbs]

If I lived in the US I'd probably go for the Tamron. In the UK however the prices are very close. As such the extra 100mm, internal zoom and ability to take teleconverter make the Sony better option in UK

[benpearce]

Really struggling on this one currently. Here in the Uk the Sony is only ~£120 more than the tamron with the current Sony cash back offer. 😵‍💫 Only thing that pulls me to the tamron is the size!

Thanks for the Comparison. I bought the Sony a while ago and i think its a superb lens, even if its a little larger. The optical Quality is superb, and its an original Sony lens. Together with my 70-200 2.8 GM and the 2X Converter it is a super Combination and worth the money. I just could afford because i sold all my old Minolta white Giants ( 300 4 APO and 400 4.5 ) . For the lenght of the Sony its really easy to handle and light.

Thanks for your allways super Camera and lens Videos

[cohoonatube]

I've been wondering why Tamron had not come out with TC's... that makes quite a bit more sense. Also not overly unsound since Sony completely opened up the lens mount. Fair and good business sense.

[kalenderquantentunnel]

Well done comparison and very informative for a potential buyer of either lens. Thank you, sir! 🙏