Anyone have experience of Tamron AF 70-300mm

[Stagecoach]

I have the opportunity to purchase a Tamron AF 70-300mm f4.5/5.6 (not the latest SP VC model) locally and wonder if anyone has any first hand experience of this particular lens.

My intention would be to purchase it primarily for taking shots of herons on the foreshore and secondly a few other smaller birds around the garden, not BIF. The focal length may even encourage me to have a go at rugby shots of which the opportunities are endless here

I'm well aware that a faster lens 'would' be better, other makes 'would/could' be better, VC 'would' be an advantage and the reviews.

My interest is regarding the real world image quality this lens can achieve.

Grahame

[HaseebM]

I have the VC USD model and its simply great for the price.

[JR1]

£85 new so it would have to be about £35 at the most pre owned to be an ok buy

[ajohnw]

I think it's best for people to look for themselves - not hard to do. This link should take you straight to lots of shots taken with it but if not just select it.

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=9

Personally I right click properties on the images to see what PP has been done as PS will improve results. There are usually some that have obviously had little or no PP such as this one

https://www.flickr.com/photos/749606...11872/sizes/o/

Doesn't look to bad to me but looks like it was a waste of time posting the info.

John
-

[Stagecoach]

I have the VC USD model and its simply great for the price.

Thank you Haseeb, I have also read similar reports for the newer VC model which is encouraging.

[Black Pearl]

There are two very different and very separate models so you need to make sure which yuou are looking at before you look at the reviews.

The none VC on is not in any way the same lens as its more expensive mate. It is a very inexpensive (but great for the money) entry level zoom whereas the VC on at four of five times the cost is a rock solid performer and comparable to Nikon VR and Canon IS lenses in the £400-500 price range.

[Stagecoach]

£85 new so it would have to be about £35 at the most pre owned to be an ok buy

Jeremy,

I do not understand the significance of your reply in relation to the question asked.

What are you basing your assumption on that something would be an OK buy?

[Stagecoach]

I think it's best for people to look for themselves - not hard to do. This link should take you straight to it but if not just select it.

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=9

Personally I right click properties to see what PP has been done as PS will improve results. There are usually some that have obviously had little or no PP such as this one

https://www.flickr.com/photos/749606...11872/sizes/o/

Doesn't look to bad to me.

John
-

John, thanks for the links.

I had found the pixel peeper site and to be honest saw nothing there that would convince me either way.

What I did find late last night was the flickr section dedicated to this specific lens with hundreds of image examples, the majority being mediocre and showing results basically as I would expect from a decent performing budget lens.

I then started coming across some images that clearly stood out as the sort of results I would be very pleased with and it was very obvious that these were taken by someone that new what they were doing. It was also good that a number of these images were taken at the extreme, 300mm f/5.6.

So, from seeing these images, posted at a similar size to what I also wish to produce demonstrated to me that in the right hands this lens has the potential I am looking for at present. With regard to possible PP work on example images my view is that if someone else had to undertake it to produce those 'good' results I could also do that.

Grahame

[Stagecoach]

There are two very different and very separate models so you need to make sure which yuou are looking at before you look at the reviews.

The none VC on is not in any way the same lens as its more expensive mate. It is a very inexpensive (but great for the money) entry level zoom whereas the VC on at four of five times the cost is a rock solid performer and comparable to Nikon VR and Canon IS lenses in the £400-500 price range.

Thanks Robin, it's certainly not the newer VC model.

[ajohnw]

I generally prefer to look at full sized images Grahame. Pixel-peepers always have them and a lot on this lens. The zero pp ones give a good idea what can be expected and the well PP's ones even more information. Reduction in size usually helps any lens on most shots.

I'd guess this lens was no slouch when cameras had 10 - 12mp which should still be fine for web shots. You will probably find you can download some of them and try working on them yourself. I generally do that sort of thing when I can find images and also with cameras. A search for photographyblog what ever it is often brings up sample images in their reviews as well. No PP. Even sample raw files for cameras.

John
-

[Stagecoach]

Decision was made on the basis of just a very small percentage of the images I saw on flickr, mainly nature subjects that stood out due to the hair/fur detail and bokeh at extreme setting so I purchased it toady.

Am I pleased, so far yes.

1/20s, f/22, ISO200, 300mm


1/250, f/5.6, ISO200, 300mm


Both images are from the RAW files each with only identical basic creative and output sharpening. Whilst the f/5.6 (max @ 300mm) is softer sharpening I believe could be increased very easily without detrimental affects at this image size.

Certain subject content has shown CA as mentioned on reviews but this is easily eradicated using ViewNX.

Now to find some real subjects

Grahame

[deetheturk]

Is the bug behind can? Looking forward to seeing the results Grahame

Cheers David

[Stagecoach]

Is the bug behind can? Looking forward to seeing the results Grahame

Cheers David

Hi David, no he's on the right side of the can in No 1, and a jumper. I took about ten shots of this and he only made the one appearance

Bugs are still scarce here at present, waiting for it to warm up.

Cheers, Grahame

[deetheturk]

Grahame, I was only pulling your leg, I first looked at the post on my Ipad and never noticed the Jumper

Or have you photo-shopped him in

Cheers, David