Tamron Lens

[Dave Humphries]

Ok, Ok, I'm new here. I have the 2 lenses that I got when I bought my D3100 Nikon 18- 55mm and Tamron 70- 300mm so I'm thinking the one you suggest would be useful as it would fall in the middle and maybe I could stop carrying 2 lenses round all the time. I borrowed a macro lens nikon 105mm 2.8 and I loved it but its a bit expensive for me right now. I have only had a DSLR about 2 years but i have done a couple of courses and I am still experimenting so I pretty much love it all.

Hi Mary,

Many thanks for adding name and location (and sorry if it felt like I was nagging).

Now I'm going to "grill you" with a round of searching questions

What subjects do you like to shoot?

Have you handled a D7000, to compare size and weight against the D3100?

What is it about the D3100 that you feel is holding you back?

3 should do for starters, as we've only just met

Pardon my manners, I should have said; welcome to the CiC forums from ...

[rtbaum]

At the risk of diverting the thread, are the swans a 100% crop from a small bit of a much larger picture Randy?

I am puzzled why you shot at f/22 as that did 'bad things' to the shutter speed at that focal length.
It probably doesn't help sharpness either, because of diffraction at f/22.
Even on the landscape, at 18mm, everything in shot will be within the DoF of say f11 or f/16 if you focus at the hyperfocal distance.

Ah, maybe your post #14 holds the answer

Cheers,

I did crop a bit, I guess from using macro, I am becoming accustomed to being able to crop as much as 50% and still retain detail. As mentioned, it admittedly not the best that I have done. Full story in regards to the shot: Driving down a narrow county road, saw the swans on shore, parked off shoulder, and approached fence. Swans were not keen on my approach and began rapid departure. Framed shot, to my horror I could not auto focus! Discovered that removing camera from bag, I had switched to manual. By the time I hurriedly recomposed and focussed, the swans were well into open water. I remembered why I prefer macro and vowed revenge upon all uncooperative swans. F/22 would not have been my choice, but at the time it was now or never. I just feel that I may have pulled it off with a 70-300, as I have found the 18-270 is soft at 270mm

[Dave Humphries]

I did crop a bit, I guess from using macro, I am becoming accustomed to being able to crop as much as 50% and still retain detail.

Yes I do too (crop a lot I mean), but at distance other factors come into play that degrade the results unless you can mitigate them effectively.

Without the rushed circumstances, I'm sure this would have been better at f/8 and 1/1250s to help with the risks of camera shake and/or subject movement - We've all been there!

Cheers,

[rtbaum]

Yes I do too (crop a lot I mean), but at distance other factors come into play that degrade the results unless you can mitigate them effectively.

Without the rushed circumstances, I'm sure this would have been better at f/8 and 1/1250s to help with the risks of camera shake and/or subject movement - We've all been there!

I do pledge revenge, the park that I frequent for many of my prairie series is the site of reintroduction of tundra swans to Mn, dang things are nesting half a block from my house
Cheers,

[rtbaum]

I do pledge revenge, I will capture the wily swans

[MICC]

I do pledge revenge, I will capture the wily swans

Dave You have made me re think, I have been checking out the Nikon 105 and can see that if I bought a new lens I would still have it to use if I wanted to upgrade my camera body later.
I enjoy most photography though don't do much portrait, just family. I love flowers and landscape particularly the sea.
I have found that the better the camera or lens is the heavier it is and which is a problem for me as I then get camera shake. Would more specific lenses help?

[davidedric]

I'm pretty much in agreement with the folks above. I have a Canon 600D and use a Sigma 17-70 f2.8/4and a Tamron 70-300 f4/5.6 as my main lenses. I fairly recently decided to buy the Tamron 18-270 VC you describe, having read the reviews and knowing what I was buying - which is pretty much what I got.

It's certainly capable of taking decent pictures, but not up to the standard of the other two lenses. However, I'm averse to carrying much, and if it means that I have the camera and lens with me instead of at home, it's worth it.

These wouldn't win any comps, but I think they're not too bad.

Shot at 80mm



And at 270mm, with a fairly hefty crop

[thequacksoflife]

Dave You have made me re think, I have been checking out the Nikon 105 and can see that if I bought a new lens I would still have it to use if I wanted to upgrade my camera body later.
I enjoy most photography though don't do much portrait, just family. I love flowers and landscape particularly the sea.
I have found that the better the camera or lens is the heavier it is and which is a problem for me as I then get camera shake. Would more specific lenses help?

Mary, I think that is the right decision. especially if you like to photograph flowers.

Lenses tend to remain "state of the art" a lot longer than cameras !

and of course like most people I lust after new cameras. I was in Park Cameras saturday and I was drooling


----------------------------------------

as to he Tamron 18-270 PZD..... ? Never used it but used the previous version and it was ok. I always thought the Nikon 16-85 and 70-300 VR were better but it was convenient. I sold it then missed having a travel zoom and bought the Nikon 18-200 - my gut feel is that is the Nikon is a sharper lens.....

[Dave Humphries]

On the cameras; your D3100 is 505g from memory and the D7000 780g.

Dave You have made me re think, I have been checking out the Nikon 105 and can see that if I bought a new lens I would still have it to use if I wanted to upgrade my camera body later.
I enjoy most photography though don't do much portrait, just family. I love flowers and landscape particularly the sea.
I have found that the better the camera or lens is the heavier it is and which is a problem for me as I then get camera shake. Would more specific lenses help?

The 105mm is also pretty heavy at 790g, but at least it has VR.

If your interest is flowers, rather than insects, plus landscape, perhaps a shorter/lighter macro prime would suit better?
I have no experience of them though.

A quick look on the Nikon comparison device (only on USA site);

Note USD prices, for comparison only as no-one buys at RRP.

AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 40mm f/2.8G = 280g = $279.95

AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED = 425g = $599.95

AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR = 355g = $529.95

AF-S Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 IF-ED = 790g = $984.95

You need AF-S to AutoFocus on your D3100.

VR means Vibration Reduction, useful to combat camera shake if hand holding, although note it is less effective the closer you get to true macro 1:1, but for flowers, unless part of the stamen, this again won't be so relevant, so VR may be worth having, I find it so with the 105mm.

DX means only works on cameras upto and including D7000, this is of little consequence to you now - and you probably know most of this stuff by now anyway.

The important things are max aperture (e.g. f/2.8), for when using for stuff other than macro and VR, plus weight and focal length. The shorter the focal length, the closer you need to be to the subject for 1:1, which is why, for shooting insects, the 105mm is the minimum and 150, 180 (Sigma) or even 200mm is more useful; so you can be further away and not spook them.

If I didn't already have a 50mm prime lens, I'd be tempted by the 40mm, no VR, but about a stop faster than my 18-200mm at that focal length and only just over 200 quid on Amazon UK.

Of course, for whole flowers, shot from a bit further away, there's the even cheaper 35mm (non-macro) f/1.8 at 144 quid

But they're not a recommendations, just a wishes for myself

Cheers,

[MICC]

Thank you all very much, thats a huge amount for me to think about and research. I will definitely buy lenses instead of a camera(though I can't help feeling a bit sad) but once I've made a decision and taken some pics I should feel better. I'll let you know what I decide. Great shots Dave with the Tamron so thats a consideration too.