How is the Tamron 70-300 f4.0-5.6 VR lens?
- Thread starter Dooku77
- Start date
Pierro
Senior Member
The tammy, (its VC not VR, as VR is a Nikon term for stabilistion, like IS is for Canon ) is pretty ok for the price in the 70-200mm range, but quality drops when racking to 300mm.
I'd agree with Rick, if the Tammy is around your price point. Spend a wee bit more and go for the Nik
I'd agree with Rick, if the Tammy is around your price point. Spend a wee bit more and go for the Nik
Last edited:
Dooku77
Senior Member
It was one of those designations. I was just wondering as to the build quality/image quality.
clarnibass
Senior Member
I saw one comparison by someone who has both where the Tamron was significantly sharper at 300mm. FWIW.
Dooku77
Senior Member
I just saw that comparison. Was it by Nikonguy on YouTube? His comparison had the Tamron with sharper image quality.
clarnibass
Senior Member
I don't remember but it was on DPReview. Although some people suggest the Nikon after comparing both... I just haven't seen any comparisons showing the Nikon is better. However some Tamron 70-300 examples show variable exposure depending aperture (i.e. over or under exposure depending on aperture).
Dooku77
Senior Member
Go on YouTube and search for the tamron 70-300 vs Nikon 70-300 and the results were extremely impressive in favor of the Tamron. Their VC works very well in especially in low light. I was impressed with the results.
I think this is one of those exceptional third party lenses where it's a difficult decision since the QI is so close. One of the problems with all reviews is they tend to be bias and attempt to prove a preconceived result. Another problem with advice and reviews is , for the most part, we like what we own and want you to experience our satisfaction.
I've found the most valuable reviews come from those that have owned both lenses in question. The most popular lens is not always the best, but it gets the most hype. I went through this when deciding between the nikon 18-200 and 16-85. The 18-200 is very popular and held in higher regard than the 16-85, yet most reviews conceded that the 16-85 was sharper. After reading reviews from owners of both, I went with the 16-85.
I have the Nikon, so from my positive experience it is the one to get, but the Tamron may certainly be just as good. The only negative I read about with third party lenses is resale value and getting "a good copy". I would suggest if you go with the Tamron, you buy it in a store where you can test it first and walk out confident that you have no quality issues to worry about.
I've found the most valuable reviews come from those that have owned both lenses in question. The most popular lens is not always the best, but it gets the most hype. I went through this when deciding between the nikon 18-200 and 16-85. The 18-200 is very popular and held in higher regard than the 16-85, yet most reviews conceded that the 16-85 was sharper. After reading reviews from owners of both, I went with the 16-85.
I have the Nikon, so from my positive experience it is the one to get, but the Tamron may certainly be just as good. The only negative I read about with third party lenses is resale value and getting "a good copy". I would suggest if you go with the Tamron, you buy it in a store where you can test it first and walk out confident that you have no quality issues to worry about.
Phillydog1958
Senior Member
So true . . . If you can find someone with both lenses, you're more likely to get an honest, unbiased opinion. I'm biased. I always go Nikon.
my past experience of tamron is not that good. (90mm macro, nice sharp optics, cheap plastic build, noisy, has issues with the d90. and the 11-18, poor image quality). i would go for the nikon 70-300 ed vr. (avoid the dx version). the value of the tamron will be far less than the nikon if you want to upgrade later, get a used one if you can, or a used nikon!
I have the Tammy 70-300mm VC lens, and love it. When I was looking, I asked about it at Nikon Cafe forums (hadn't found this place yet). Most of the folks there told me the Tamron was sharper than the Nikon 70-300 VR lens, in the 200-300mm range. Since I was getting it for wildlife shots, I figured it would be set to 300mm most of the time, and it is. It is good and sharp. I've not used the Nikon 70-300mm, so I have no personal experience in comparing the two. I just took the word of several people that had used both, and preferred the Tamron. I'm very happy with it. I got mine at Amazon.com. Right now, it has a $100 mail-in rebate, which gets the price down to $349. When used on a D7000, the f/4-5.6 does very well in low light too. It also has a better warranty than the Nikon lens. The VC (vibration compensation) works very well. I like it better than Nikon's VR, but the VR is a little quieter.
Good luck!
Good luck!
Dooku77
Senior Member
Thanks for the input. I still haven't purchased any new lens yet. Being that there are no camera stores near where I live, I have to go off of user feedback and reviews. I'm still leaning towards the Tamron.