The lens itself was nice for beginner. Photo guality was nice, expect for chromatic aberration. Also the price was cheap. Actually too cheap. The flaws were the amount of chromatic aberration, slow autofocus and the lack of USD focus and Vibration Compensation. But, after 5 months of usage, it started showing error for missing contacts between the camera and the lens. Also, the aperture started jamming into F/32 randomly. I sent it to Tamron Service, and they said it could not be fixed. So, ...
View review in forums Leave a comment on this review
this lens has been often "underjudged", inspite of its fine construction. Most of tele zoom have lower results at the high tele ende.
naturally it is necessary to close the apetrure to f-8-11 and to use a higher ISO range. for sunshine and quick movements optimal to use. If doing this, you'll get phantastic shootings with it.
the maacr device allows to take nice nice photos with flash and ISO 100 of butterlies.
very content with it and highly recommended
reviewed January 3rd, 2015 (purchased for $80)
- 7 out of 10 pointsand recommended by six100 (10 reviews)
Range. Cheap. In general it is a good perfomer (for the price you have to pay for it, of course).
CA. Resolution. Cheap build.
This was my first lens back when I switched from P&S cameras to DSRLs so for me at that time, the quality of the pictures I took with it where very nice and the results exiting. But even after more than a year using DSLRs and having the chance to use many lenses in the meantime, you simply can't believe this is a 120u$s lens by looking at the pictures it produces, especially when comparing those pictures with others taken with lenses that are as much as 10 times the cost of this one.
All in all the lens is a great deal for what you pay. Image quality is very acceptable and the range is very usefull.
On the down side: pictures have a noticeable chromatic aberration and it's construction is very "cheap", not only in the looks but in the feel too, but for 120 bucks that is more than acceptable.
A couple of pics taken with it:
reviewed January 8th, 2007 (purchased for $130)
- 7 out of 10 pointsand recommended by mu55ster (10 reviews)
Cheap, cheap, cheap
Cheap (sorry three out weigh one)
This lens suprised me. On the 6mp DS i was ready to throw it away after no interest on ebay - I put it on the 10mp K10D - whole new lease of life - MUCH sharper - very strange...
Autofocus is still alittle slow and noisy but the quality of the lens is quite amazing for the price - sharpness on the 10mp sensor is amazing considering the price - although it is still quite prone to fringing - some of which is not fixable, even with lightroom.
If your after a budget tele-zoom I can recomend it for sharpness but expect some fringing.
reviewed December 16th, 2006
- 5 out of 10 pointsand recommended by Odradek (6 reviews)
Light, well built, and dirty cheap.
Not sharp at all, lots of CA, slow aperture and slow focus.
I bought this lens over a year, as a first long focal trial lens for my D70, and i must say i have mixed feelings towards it. On one hand, it has a nice focal range and unlike other zooms in this range (dirty cheap zooms range, i mean) it can focus quit near (0.95m!) although i wouldn't call it macro.
Images are definitely lacking sharpness, but that's not at all a bad feature: you can get the most beautifull, creamy portraits out of it. I know i have! It really has the most beautifull bokeh... You can forget photos of distante objects/people/birds... There just isn't enough resolution in it to achieve this task. And though one needs a clear bright day to make the most out of this lens (stoping it down to f/8 - f/11 really helps, but that leeds to slow shutter speeds, high ISO settings, tripods, etc...), then CA strikes hard: and this lens can deliver CA like no other i've ever seen! I really don't know what's that LD glass doing in there...
On the other hand it's a light, inexpensive, quite well built lens, that seconds to none of the Nikon/Nikkor 70-300 zooms (yes, i do mean that neither the G nor the ED Nikkor 70-300 zoom performs any better than this lens, in any way, and that's a fact: a cheap zoom is nothing but a cheap zoom, whatever the brand. Actually rumors are that both Nikon zooms are made by Tamron!!!). Any significant step beyond will make you, or i, spend over $600... used. Do i want better lens(es) in this range? You bet i do... Will i get rid of it? I think not, not yet... Like any other tool, you just have to know where it works the best... and use it there. Did i say it cost me only 100EUR ($80) brand new, lens shade, front and back caps, and warranty included?!
reviewed December 12th, 2006 (purchased for $80)
- 8 out of 10 pointsand recommended by Neogene (8 reviews)
Focal length, macro 1:2
Chromatic Aberrations, no internal focus, plastic, noisy.
I got this lens in bundle with my Nikon D50. I used this lens for about 4 months before deciding to switch to the Sigma 70-300 apo.
UPDATED: i came back to it from Sigma because i found it a bit much constant in term of sharpeness instead of the Sigma which is more blurred on the corners.
It's really noisy and shows chromatic aberrations , but for that price it's really worth.
It's a nice lens. Suggested.
reviewed November 30th, 2006 (purchased for $180)
- 7 out of 10 pointsand recommended by cjbowlsby (17 reviews)
size, weight, range, macro capability
build quality, slippery zoom ring
I've had this lens for about a year now, and I'm surpised by how much I enjoy using it. It's light with and exellent focal length range for candids & portraits, as long as there's enought light.
The macro capability, though soft in the corners, is surprisingly good for a lens this inexpensive; just make sure a tripod is used! Hand holding a macro shot between 180mm & 300mm is very difficult.
My only real complaint is that the zoom ring has almost no ridges to provide friction, so I have to grip it very hard in order to zoom. That's one of the big plusses for the new Di version of this lens.