Tamron 70-300mm. Experience? Thoughts?

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by InLimbo87, Aug 4, 2008.

  1. InLimbo87

    InLimbo87

    452
    Jul 30, 2008
    Orlando, Fl
  2. InLimbo87

    InLimbo87

    452
    Jul 30, 2008
    Orlando, Fl
    Thanks for the link... I'll have to give it some thought.

    This addressed my question perfectly, though (yet didn't fully answer it LOL)

     
  3. I owned the Tamron 70-300 for a brief time. It was slow to focus, hunted for focus and misfocused on a regular basis. If there was enough light (and by enough, I mean TONS), it was OK. It was also very soft above 200mm. I got a few nice images with it, but the optics were not good.

    I sold it for a loss, bought the Nikon 70-300 VR and was VERY glad to have done so. YMMV.


    IMO, the Tamron 70-300 will be a downgrade from your current Nikon 55-200. VR doesn't enter the equation in my opinion. I'm merely talking about optics.
     
  4. InLimbo87

    InLimbo87

    452
    Jul 30, 2008
    Orlando, Fl
    What about the 55-200mm VR. Obviously the VR would be a huge plus, but how are the optics in comparison to my Non-VR?
     
  5. If you are looking for a 70-300mm lens and can't afford the Nikon VR version, I would definitely look at the Nikon 70-300mm non-VR ED version (not the G, although it doesn't do bad). I have this lens (the ED version) and the difference between it and the VR, IMHO, is minimal when you discount the VR. I definitely would take it over the Tamron...and I like Tamron.

    Best wishes on your choice.
     
  6. bradNYC

    bradNYC

    Mar 28, 2008
    NYC
    Why would you settle? Then what do you do when you replace the Tammy? Save your money and get the one you really want.
     
  7. gd1418

    gd1418

    195
    Feb 3, 2008
    Gurgaon, India
    When I was looking for a 70-300 for my D80, I initially bought a SIGMA 70-300mm DG Macro for Nikon for $155 and upgraded within a week to APO version of the same by paying $60 more. While the non-apo returned stunning picturs at 300mm handheld, the APO on a tripod did not give the same results of the same subject with same settings on a tripod.

    Dumped it and on Tuesday got myself a Nikon 70-300mm VR. Haven't stopped gushing over it as yet. You can also see my photograph of the jumping cricket elsewhere here on this forum under '70-300mm sewwt pictures'.

    Before going for VR I casually asked my camera guy for a Tamron XR Di VC LD Aspherical IF Macro 28-300 and he outright rejected it saying it would not be a good buy.

    My two cents
     
  8. Exactly.

    I bought the Tamron for $100 on ebay from Canoga Camera (reputable dealer). It retails for about $180; I thought I was getting a great deal because I was getting a new lens at a used price. I sold it for a $25 loss because nobody wants it. They pop up here on the For Sale Forum every now and again and just keep getting bumped up. Lesson learned.

    Shoot what you've got, save a little longer and get quality glass.
     
  9. InLimbo87

    InLimbo87

    452
    Jul 30, 2008
    Orlando, Fl
    Thank you all for your responses. I'm considering a sigma 70-300mm APO at the moment, but not sure if I'm going to go for it.