Anyone have the Tamron 28-300MM F/3.5-6.3 ?

jdeg

^ broke something
Staff member
I realize the reason it's so much cheaper than the Nikkor equivalent (28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G) is the difference in aperture at 300mm. Is the difference that dramatic? Do you think the Tamron is worth the price?
 

AxeMan - Rick S.

Senior Member
Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens $1,049.00
Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD VC (Vibration Compensation) Aspherical (IF) $599.00

I own The Nikon lens, can't tell you much about the Tamron.

The only thing I don't like about the Nikon lens is at 100mm it is already down to f5.6. But thanks to advice found here on Nikonites I have learned by bumping up my ISO to 800-1000 and shooting at f8 helped this lens out a lot at 300mm

My only concern for you is with the Tamron it might do the same thing, but now you're looking at f6.3 instead of f5.6. That's a big jump and I don't know if bumping up your ISO will help you gain back enough for you at f6.3. I'm not good in that area of using ISO to gain back f-stops.

I like Nikon glass, that's why I own a Nikon. The 28-300mm is a big heavy lens, but the trade off for me is it gives me such a wide range I can shoot with, and not have to worry about missing a shot because I was changing lenses or had the wrong lens on.

If it was me and I had to do it again, I'd bite the big one and get the Nikon. That f6.3 scares me, and even more after using the Nikon lens.

Hope this was some help.
Rick
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top