Tamron 18-270

[Felipe_Perth]

Hu guys.


I'm new in this photography area. I'm really enjoying that. I bought a nikon D3000 and I'm looking for some lenses. I saw the Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD. I've never knew about this brand.

I need some opnions. What you guys think about this lenses????


Cheerss

[dlambert]

Tamron and Sigma are among the most popular third-party lens manufacturers. Both of these brands offer a wide variety of lenses for popular mounts, and quality can vary from pretty iffy to quite good, depending on the lens. It's pretty common for both of these guys to target a lens from Canon or Nikon and release a competing version that's a little cheaper than it, but with the 18-270, Tamron really exceeded (in zoom range, anyway) anything else that's available on the market.

Unfortunately, zoom lenses that cover wide ranges are typically not super-sharp at any focal length (compared to primes or shorter zooms), and the 18-270 sort of falls into that category. It's tough to beat the convenience of this lens as a one-size-fits-all solution, but if you want really high quality, you'll probably want to look at two or more lenses to cover this range. (shameless plug: read more about zooms vs. primes here). Since the 18-270 covers such a wide zoom range, it might be well-suited as a travel lens in cases where you don't want to drag two or three lenses around, but only if you're ok with the compromises in image quality. I'd recommend reading dpReview's report on this lens for more detail.

As a side-note, I think the image quality of Tamron's 18-270 have a whole lot more to do with trying to cover that huge range with one lens, vs. any general comment on the quality of Tamron's lenses. They've got several lenses (the 17-50 f/2.8 in particular) that I've heard really good things about.

As a new photographer, it's tough to find a good lens-buying strategy, since you probably don't know a lot about the ranges you're going to be shooting most often. The most typical upgrade path is probably to build onto your kit lens with a telephoto zoom and something like a 50mm prime, but it might be worth thinking about the 18-270 to start with, especially if you don't have a kit lens. This would help you get some experience with a wide range of focal lengths and let you upgrade in the parts of that range where you want the most quality.

[Thunder_o_b]

Start with quality, stay with quality, it will save you money in the long run. It is all about the image. I have the Tamron 17-50mm, and my wife has the IS version, we are not at all impressed with its IQ, and with mine the front element almost fell off after a year of use.

But then, it is IQ above all else to me, I have always favored primes and the Sigma that I have is out standing (150mm macro)…The 120mm-400mm Sig is not bad, and has given me some passable shots, but I am saving for the 500mm prime.

Like dlambert said, if IQ is not more important than convenance, those zooms do the job.

Happy shooting with what ever you decide.

[nicled]

Get the sigma 18-250mm. I have one and and i'm happy with its performance.

[Felipe_Perth]

Originally Posted by dlambert

Tamron and Sigma are among the most popular third-party lens manufacturers..... .

I do have the lens kit. But it's like you wrote I need a lenses to substitute my kit. I'll seachr more about those lenses. Thanks for the help man