Tamron Sp Af 70-300mm 4-56 Di Usd a-mount Lens Reviews
reviews found: 54 1 ii >>
 AVLB #45678 date: Mar-28-2021 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: four.v | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 55-300 (APSC merely) KM 75-300 D Sony 70-400 SSM I |
| price paid: | £120 |
| positive: | Nifty build quality. Sharp. Good flare control. Good CA control with prissy petal hood. Not besides heavy. Almost silent when focusing. |
| negative: | No zoom lock |
| comment: | I was on the wait out for a Sony 70-300 SSM, simply I came across this lens by risk and after reading reviews on it decided this was equally skillful as the Sony. When comparison prices, the Tamron clearly came out on top. My first ane I bid on, I lost, but was lucky plenty to come across some other MINT condition lens and actually paid less than the i I lost the bid on! I was pleasantly surprised how skilful the lens feels on both my Sony A99 and Sony A68. I have not tried it nevertheless on the A850, only as that is like in weight to the A99, it should feel fine. My kickoff test shots were on the A99 and even broad open at f4, the lens is really sharp, specially in the centre. Stopping down, even half a stop cleans upwardly any softness in the corners. I was really impressed. Colours equally good every bit Minolta ones besides. On the A68, I was also impressed that without any MFA, this lens is still sharp. Compared to the 55-300, this gets a lower overall rating on Dyxum, but my opinion is that it equals if not betters it. It certainly feels a superior build lens and sharpness is better. The less said most the KM 75-300, the ameliorate, as this really is an inferior lens to both the Sony and Tamron. Compared to the Sony lxx-400 SSM, the Tamron really does concur its ain and although the Sony has a slight edge on build and features, information technology does not really offer much more that being twice the weight. A day out with the long lenses in the futurity will almost certainly mean taking both the Sony seventy-400 on the A99 and the Tamron 70-300 on either the A850, or the A68 |
| A68noob #44548 appointment: Jul-11-2020 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: 3.v | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to ain this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 18-270 Sony 70-300G SSM Minolta 70-210 F4 Beercan |
| cost paid: | 100€ used |
| positive: | + for its cost, skillful and cute build (i like information technology much more than the 3x expensive 70-300G sony) + good hood (especially its surface which is resistent to scratches.. compared to cheap and weak Grand hood) + fast and pretty silent AF (slightly junior in both terms to G tho) + overall pretty much the best price/performance seventy-300 from my experience.. simply nonetheless nothing to brag nearly + at lower focal lenghts sharpness and colours were practiced |
| negative: | - no zoom lock (merely mine was luckily a flake stiff, then nonetheless no zoom creep - i would have still wished it had a lock) - soft (I did a side by side exam and the 70-210 beercan won.. nuff said. peculiarly when compared at ~130mm, where max aperture is 5.6.. the stopped downward beercan won easily) - quite some CA (at least at 300mm). at some point every bit bad as beercan, easily worse than my Tamron 18-270. - especially at 300mm a lot of pumping AF - simply 1:iv magnification @ ane,5m MFD - the offset lens i take always had that had bug with the A68 congenital in 7,5x and 15x magnifier option - it would simply disrupt and therefore not allow me to precisely MF if AF didnt want to piece of work properly - this lens plain needs some serious stopping down to perform well (+ fast plenty shutter speed at 300mm).. resulting to exist only an effective lens in nothing but the brightest daylight |
| comment: | I originally started with 270mm Tamron with ordinarily good results. Upgraded to Sony 70300G, only bit disappointed (peculiarly in terms of price/performance). Bought this lens very cheap, mint 2nd manus to practise some testing vs lenses stated above.. and I was only disappointed. Yeah, it may be the best upkeep choice IF yous actually dont demand bully operation at 300mm, but if you own at least something compareable like a beercan i dont see a reason why you lot should need this lens.. particularly for closeby animalhunting: Apart from cute and overnice build, cheap price and silent AF zippo else to fight my the long listing of negative aspects. Bad performance up close, CA, much lite required and particularly the broken magnifier incamera selection was the concluding dealbreaker for me. Havent had flare issues due to large hood (good) and deceit comment on distortion. Disclaimer: My ratings are based on price/operation. |
| QuietOC #29649 engagement: Aug-vi-2016 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 55-300 F4.v-5.half dozen SAM Minolta AF lxx-210 F4 Minolta AF lxx-210 F3.5-4.5 Canon EF lxx-300 F4-5.vi IS II USM Sony seventy-300 F4.5-v.half dozen SSM II Sony 70-400 F4-5.vi G SSM Minolta AF 75-300 F4.v-5.6 BBC Minolta AF 100-300 F4.five-5.6 APO/D Minolta AF 100-400 F4.5-6.vii APO Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX DG APO |
| price paid: | 185 USD (used) |
| positive: | Apartment focus plane Good lateral CA command Very little distortion Parfocal Fantabulous dissimilarity Full-frame coverage Internal focus Always available DMF Uniform with Kenko DGX teleconverters Very large petal hood 62 mm filter size |
| negative: | Chubby size and weight Extending zoom Boring, somewhat noisy AF AF switch prone to unintentional bumps Strong, uneven zoom action Zoom pitter-patter, no lock Vague, rear focus control No VC, no limiter, no buttons Doesn't back up fastest A-mount communication Incorrect Lens ID |
| comment: | After my disappointment with a $250 "new" display model from an authorized dealer, I purchased a second used re-create from an private seller for $150. This used re-create is sharper than the previous new ane. The normal list price for this lens is $450, just there is often a $100 rebate for it. Tamron offers a like lens with vibration compensation (VC) for Canon EF and Nikon F mounts for the same price. Later selling my A-mount copy I bought a used VC version with a Canon EF mount. This copy was also non very sharp. I replaced it with the newer Canon EF seventy-300 IS 2 USM. "Made IN CHINA" If you find a skilful copy, this lens is pretty good optically. Its focus plane is even flatter on APS-C than the 1986 Minolta AF 75-300 "Big Beercan". Information technology also has good lateral CA command giving it the best raw image quality in the APS-C corners. The middle sharpness wide-open is very skilful compared to the other full-frame zooms, but can be softer than the 55-300. This is mostly noticeable at the long end especially when using teleconverters. At shut-focus it is a bit wider in field-of-view than the 55-300 at the long end. The A-mount version borrows the lens ID from the Sony 70-300G SSM meaning the A77 and newer Sony cameras will apply the lens compensations for that lens to JPEGs and embed that profile in the raw files. It also means all the special focus modes are enabled. This lens does non support the latest/fastest A-mount communication charge per unit introduced with the A77 and DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM kit zoom, which ways this lens does not support the faster tracking that the newer DT 55-300 SAM and lxx-300G SSM II support on the current bodies including the Sony A9. The zoom mechanism feels similar but even a piffling flake worse the 70-300G II. Using the zoom on both of these makes me want to rate their builds as "three". The less expensive DT 55-300 and 75-300 D zooms zoom mechanisms feel nicer to operate. The rear focus command is one of the improve clutched mechanisms I've tried. It is nicely weighted and polish with the stops noticeable by bear on and ear. It is still vague and imprecise, and the always bachelor DMF information technology offers is yet practically useless. I often turn the focus ring by blow when trying to zoom. The 70-300G has a similar system but with more separation betwixt the control rings. The last A-mount copy focused better than the previous one maybe because the lens is sharper. The lack of back up for the updated A-mount advice means information technology works fully with the Kenko DGX teleconverters. I am even able to become the AF to lock on occasionally with existent globe subjects using the 2X teleconverter at 600 mm. Nonetheless, the Minolta AF 100-400 APO has amend image quality past 300 mm. The USD as well works on the Maxxum 70 though the older AF system struggles much more than the one in the A65. It also works much better than the SAM telephotos with the LA-EA1 on the A5000. The bodily focusing speed is adequately slow. In fact is the slowest focus racking x-300mm zooms I've tried. Information technology has internal focus, but if you look in the front of the lens while focusing you can see information technology has to move a group of large elements near the forepart of the lens a large distance--further than the external forepart focusing zooms extend for focusing. The EF version doesn't focus whatsoever meliorate on the MC-11 on my A7II than the A-mount version on the LA-EA3. Like the Sony DT xviii-135 SAM and SSM lenses, the AF switch on the lens is redundant and the lens responds to the AF switch on the camera trunk. Both switches have to be fix to AF for the USD to function. I continue accidentally bumping the switch on the lens. I missed several shots because of AF getting turned off this manner. I would definitely disable that switch if could. It lacks the partial range limiter and the focus hold button found on the 70-300G lenses. The second copy of this lens redeems its optical performance. Initial field testing though produced some out-of-focus results. It doesn't seem to take the accuracy of the DT lenses, but that might be able to be corrected on other bodies. The size, weight, and functioning are worse than the DT 55-300 mm. I found it very uncomfortable to use on the A65 or A58 for long sessions without boosted support. Test chart comparison |
| jacksprat #27586 date: May-24-2016 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: iv | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | beer can 70-210 |
| price paid: | $269 in 2014 |
| positive: | range, USD, overall optics are good, build is solid |
| negative: | size, weight, slower to focus than I would like. This lens is hard to hold and rest while trying to zoom or manual focus mainly because of the big diameter. |
| comment: | Bought this lens thinking that the extra range from 210-300 would be nice. On my A77, the pictures in this range are good but not sharp enough (fifty-fifty afterwards micro conform). While the optics of this lens are better, I actually like the beercan better in some ways. The size of this lens and weight are the reasons I sold information technology. IF the picture quality from the extra range would have been ameliorate, I may have kept information technology. I've read that to go a sharper epitome in the 300mm range, you must push toward F8. Sadly, the lens had to go since I hardly used information technology. |
| Zastavia #11551 engagement: December-21-2013 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: four | tested on:
|
| buying: | I ain this lens |
| compared to: | TAMRON 55-200 di 2 SIGMA 120-400 APO DG OS HSM TAMRON lxx-300 Di LD Macro MINOLTA 28-105 |
| price paid: | 539.00 |
| positive: | >Slap-up build quality >Splendid manual focus ability >Sharpness increases to a higher place f/7.one and better notwithstanding above f/9 >First-class silent motor bulldoze >Very proficient command of flare and CA |
| negative: | >Recurring focus-lock problems regardless of light or subject or camera body. >Occasional over-exposure issues only rectified by spot metering(!) >Removal of VC however no price decrease on SONY version(!) >Oddly, struggles to evangelize stabilised images even as loftier as 1/180 sec. >Struggles to gather lite on overcast/darkened days. >New parts fitted nether warranty did not solve issues. >Loftier price to pay for boilerplate or sub-standard results. |
| comment: | I was quite excited when I beginning received this lens almost two years ago. Subsequently getting rid of the disappointing Sigma 120-400 (which was poor and hazy at tele terminate), I put aside my TAMRON 55-200 to get used to this new lens. For static photography on my old a33 it seemed at first fine, delivering fairly sharp photos at bigger apertures and better sharpness around f/9, with decent but slightly muted colors (notwithstanding I could encounter less sharpness than my former 55-200 TAMRON). However, the lens proved to exist most hopeless for annihilation moving, regardless of light or shutter speed and also with continuous af and even higher ISO. At an airshow nigh of my photos were out of focus despite at least 1/500 shutter and great low-cal. Simply a few shots were usable. The aforementioned happens when it is used to birds in flight, nearly all shots are fuzzy and out of focus-a trouble I have never had with the 55-200. I have been shooting action for years which is why I went for SONY's SLT models, and thought this lens considering the price would be up easily to the chore. The lens besides occasionally stuttered rapidly, refusing to lock onto even static subjects, this was cured by rotating the manual focus band rapidly left and right, or constantly re-priming the shutter...failing that, the camera would have to powered off then on again. Thinking this was a trouble between the compatibility of the lens and the a33, I upgraded to the superb a57, and the lens seemed to perform slightly amend, nonetheless, upon attention a car rally in the bright summertime, once once again many shots were out of focus giving me the impression the absenteeism of the VC unit of measurement was the crusade and SONY's congenital-in SSS was struggling to keep upwards somehow. Upon turning SSS off, the trouble did not become abroad. The problems have continued to this day and I have struggled greatly with this lens, information technology's weaknesses outpacing it'south strengths of which is sharpness at smaller apertures, smooth (but not fast) focus and proficient movie ability. Compared to my TAMRON 55-200 di Ii which was £89 new, there is only no match. The 55-200 outguns the 70-300 in nearly all areas including sharpness, light-gathering, focus speed and particularly focus accurateness on which the lxx-300 is just atrocious, frequently over shooting, then coming back, and then overshooting again. I have never had this problem with any other lenses I have always owned, even on 35mm cameras on which I am sure I can reach greater results. As a terminal resort I recently sent the lens away to Tamron and information technology came back later on nigh 7 weeks (!) with new focus motor, thrust barrel, new circuitry etc and it is notwithstanding exactly the same. I am strongly considering scrapping it and going for a SONY 70-300 G or even a inexpensive Sig 70-300 as a stop-gap. The use of this lens is like a roller coaster, 1 minute giving yous a high with good results mainly on static subjects, the next woefully letting yous downwardly even in perfect conditions with perfect settings. I would be very reluctant to purchase some other TAMRON lens such as this. UPDATE 24/12/13 I got outside for a walk in sunny weather condition for a couple of hours with this lens. It at present has a more than major exposure trouble especially over 135mm, blasting images with lots of lite on anything higher up f6.3. Changing ISO, shutter speed, lite source, re-attaching lens etc made no difference. Dropping to f5.6 and locking the exposure according to the blueish sky resolved this generally. As well the focus started to become very slow and was clearly indicated so in the lens' focus window. The resulting shots of a static tree at one/160 sec were all out of focus. I switched to the TAMRON 55-200 and everything was fine, so I know my cameras metering is ok. I have searched the internet and cannot discover any other issues like this, then I guess I am the but person in the world to have a faulty 70-300 sp that is bad on two bodies! |
| brikas #11369 appointment: Oct-vi-2013 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: 1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I ain this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 55-200mm Minolta AF 70-210mm (beercan) Minolta AF 75-300mm |
| toll paid: | 220 GBP (used) |
| positive: | Cheap USD feels like SSM on Sony lens |
| negative: | Slow aperture Inexpensive plastic smells a bit Atrocious sharpness Colors aren't nice |
| comment: | I'm not surprised about this lens, the only real bonus is silent USD autofocus motor, otherwise information technology feels like cheap Minolta 75-300mm. I retrieve, instead of this, I'd amend go for Sony 55-300mm: cheaper and smaller, as 55-200mm colors I like more than these Tamron and test shots looks like the 55-200 and 55-300 has very similar colors. 300mm cease was important for me, not the sharpest lens in that stop, about the same IQ as beercan @210mm and F4. Now because well-nigh old Minolta fixed aperture prime 200mm or lxxx-200, no more money waste on these slow aperture telephoto zoom lenses. Afeter using sixteen-50, this feels like a class or ii lower production, probably it is, merely many says it has the same IQ and performance as 70-300 Thousand, can't believe in that... Maybe I'll change my mind later on some more serious photo-shoots in the field, but local park experience tells me there wont be many surprises... Updated on 10/x/2013 |
| MediaArchivist #11206 date: Jun-24-2013 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| buying: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | beercan |
| price paid: | 350 USD (new) |
| positive: | Range Price Dissimilarity/color Weight/size |
| negative: | Aperture Bokeh |
| comment: | I bought this lens to get me by until I could beget a more than "proper" long zoom. I have been quite impressed! Steady Shot works exactly similar it is supposed to, fifty-fifty at 300mm. I read a lot of reviews dinging the lens for not incorporating VC in the optics like the versions for other camera. I can't see why that is a problem since the photographic camera takes care of information technology and so well. It is pretty sharp throughout the range: on the a99 at 300mm wide open (f/5.6) the corners are slightly soft but you have to pixel peep to notice. Vignetting is also very low. At that place is a bit of CA, but nothing surprising for a lens like this and it cleans up very well in LR. Information technology certainly feels like a solid lens. Nothing jiggles or rattles, it has a metallic mount, and the focus and zoom rings are easy to grip. The zoom ring is non very smooth, but it may soften a lilliputian with use. At that place is no zoom creep. The lens hood is huge, but of course it has to exist. Without the hood flare can exist a petty flake of a problem, just nothing surprising. Information technology has the worst bokeh of whatever of my lenses-- but to be fair I am somewhat of a bokeh snob and all my lens purchases accept reflected that. Comparison it to some of the all-time bokeh lenses bachelor for the Alpha line might not lead to a relevant conclusion. The lens surprised me in so many other areas, then maybe my expectations were a lilliputian farthermost? Looking at the sample photos of other zooms it seems to exist in the center of the pack. AF is fast, quiet, and authentic. Great trick-- the a99 and a99ii think the lens is a Sony lxx-300 G, which supports AF-D mode and hybrid AF (respectively). Sure enough, all the footling extra focus points light upwards in those modes! I doubtable that since the lens is non *identical* to the Sony, it is not working in the same way. I take not noticed any issues in whatever focus mode-- DMF works and right out of the box it was accurate without any micro adjustment. On both the a99 and a99ii, AF-C tracking works very well. The focus band rotates virtually a half turn, and is nicely damped. What really impressed me was the colour and contrast throughout the focal and aperture range. Due to the bokeh it will not exist my showtime choice for a portrait, but I have used information technology for portraits and the results were quite expert. The big test for me was using information technology indoors, handheld and at 300mm, for a comedy prove. Wide open up at 300mm is simply f/five.6, but the fact that a spotlight was on the stage helped. I got some corking shots that would non have been possible with any other lens in my collection. I am not a big fan of zooms in general, merely I have been forcing myself to utilise this outdoors from time to time. So far, I continue to be impressed! I wish it had a wider aperture, but of course that would make it more heavy, larger, and much more than expensive. It works extremely well outdoors in sunlight, and surprisingly well indoors if the lighting is acceptable. Information technology is well worth the money I paid for it. Recommended. |
| ryanmont #11202 appointment: Jun-nineteen-2013 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: 4.v | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 100-300 APO, Sigma 70-300 APO, Tamron 200-400, Minolta eighty-200 2.8 |
| cost paid: | 300 USD- Used |
| positive: | Very tranquillity, good focus, good sharpness, prissy color. DMF |
| negative: | Hood Pattern, mediocre focus speed |
| annotate: | I really similar this lens, I've had several lenses in this focal range and this one is my electric current favorite. It's a nice overall parcel when because the sharpness, focal machinery, the size, and price. I've used in on my Sony A77 and it was good but one time I micro adjusted the lens profile to -2 it is at present outstanding. I observe that it is a very piece of cake to use and the DMF feature makes information technology very easy to fine melody the focal plane when you need to piece though layers of foreground. I've only used it for a few hundred clicks but I consider it a keeper. I feel that it'due south precipitous throughout the focal range and above aperture 6.3 information technology actually produces some spectacular images. No lens is perfect merely since I've got familiar with how to best utilize if for my purposes I appreciate its capabilities and enjoy the range it offers. |
| godsakes #10546 date: Sep-28-2012 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Big Beercan minolta 100-300mm apo Sony 70-300mm G sigma 100-300mm f4 |
| toll paid: | missing |
| positive: | All-time value lens of information technology's form (near) silent sonic motor manageable size/weight of it'south form |
| negative: | No focus limiter No VC every bit on other mounts Non a huge image quality spring up from mid priced options |
| annotate: | First impressions: Adept performer, a touch better than the mid priced lenses such as the big beercan or minolta 100-300 apo, producing a crisper image with less glow and CA than the older alternatives. I'd say the Grand and sigma 100-300/4 are still meliorate lenses just on a value for money basis, it seems to exist the best option for someone looking to spend more than than budget money. One of the things I like about this lens is it'southward a decent size/weight that's manageable. Information technology's shorter (simply fatter) than the large beercan which makes the Tamron easier to fit into smaller bags and unlike the sigma 100-300mm f4 it's weight isn't problematic, it tin exist packed in as a just in case lens (simply) where as I would be reluctant to carry the sigma around unless I was confident I needed it. AF speed is okay but nothing special (seems to pause briefly when the motor needs to change direction, as if the lens is having a think near which direction to go), only then none of the other lenses mentioned are particularly fast IMHO. The (near) silent AF motor is a nice bonus from the older models. All in all a good compromise on image quality, toll and bulk, just I wish they included a focus limiter and VC. |
| Michevan #10421 appointment: Aug-1-2012 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: three.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta seventy-210 BC, Sigma 24-135, Tamron 18-250, Tamron 200-400, (compared to Minolta 200 2.eight for kicks but non a off-white matchup) |
| price paid: | $350 after rebate |
| positive: | Focus speed, size, price, better CA control than the beercan |
| negative: | Sharpness, blokeh, colors, overexposure |
| annotate: | As e'er, looking for a walk effectually zoom that beats the beercan. Let me showtime outset past saying that I have a nice copy of the BC, and accept owned information technology for nearly 25 years. On the positive front, the Tamron is fashion faster, and and then much quieter. I think the wonderful praise stops there. To be sure, this is a overnice lens, just I do not feel that it had been appropriately reviewed in this forum. I retrieve there is a instance of college lens rating based in part on the price of the lens. No question, this lens provides good value for the money. Comparing the shots throughout the focal length range (including cropped BC photos), the colors were non as nice, and the sharpness was really a toss up. Either broad open up or stopped downward, the lens had a tendency to slightly overexpose each shot. The same upshot occurred on both the A700 and the SLT57. My father and I took the lens through a really complete workout using mitt held, tripod, sunlight, cloudy, and indoor shots. The results were solid, but certainly not keen. In both our views, this lens falls below the BC in overall shot quality. Assuming the G lens is a 5, and the BC is a iv, this falls to about a 3.75. Dainty, merely certainly not worth the current rating of 4.72. |
| robberly12 #10321 date: Jun-24-2012 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: iv.five | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I ain this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 75-300 f/4.v-5.vi Sigma 18-250 f/three.5-6.3 HSM |
| price paid: | 350 USD (new) |
| positive: | Sony G-serial quality Bargain price Very abrupt Directly transmission focus Well-nigh silent focusing Low baloney & CA Great warranty |
| negative: | Somewhat slow focus Questionable quality control |
| comment: | The Tamron SP seventy-300mm f/4-5.6 Di USD is an fantabulous quality telephoto zoom lens. It is nearly identical to the Sony 70-300G F4.5-v.6 lens in size, weight and image quality, but costs less than half every bit much. One of the few differences between it & the Yard-series lens is that it is actually a faster lens on the curt terminate (f/4). It is truthful direct manual focus lens, which allows the photographer to freely plow the focus ring in AF as well as MF mode. This makes it possible to lock focus of the lens in AF style, but still fine tune the focus equally necessary. The lens also includes a well-marked focus-distance window. Motorcar-focus is nearly silent but, unfortunately, a lilliputian sluggish. In low-dissimilarity situations, especially, focus will hunt before finally settling on a setting. Including a focus-limiter would have been helpful for situations like this. Focusing on birds-in-flight is too sometimes a striking & miss proffer. Build quality seems generally good -- sturdy plastic with a metal mountain. Quality-control of this Chinese-made lens, though, seems less than stellar. The lens stopped auto-focusing two months subsequently I bought it. Fortunately, Tamron repaired the lens rapidly under their first-class 6-year warranty. The other QC-issue I've encountered is that a couple times I've temporarily noticed intermittent electric contact between the lens & camera trunk. Images are abrupt across the focal-length range with good colors & a low level of chromatic aberration. Flare is well controlled with Tamron's substantial lens hood. On a side note, the lens physically worked well with my Kenko Teleplus MC4 ane.4x DGX Teleconverter. It correctly reported the exif data, and I was able to autofocus at 300mm when the subject had practiced light and contrast. Image quality took a moderate hitting but was nonetheless good enough that this lens-TC combination was useful to me. The Tamron SP 70-300mm f/iv-5.6 Di USD is a high quality zoom lens at an unbeatable price. It is equivalent in quality to Sony's expensive Thou-serial lens & blows away Sony'southward 75-300 kit lens! |
| andyken #10276 date: Jun-eight-2012 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: five | tested on:
|
| buying: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 100-300 f3.v-v.6 APO Minolta 75-300 f3.v-5.six N Minolta 70-210 f4 (beercan) Minolta 100-200 f4.v Sony 55-200 f4-five.6 |
| price paid: | £250 (used) |
| positive: | Superb IQ and very sharp at every discontinuity and every focal length. Feels well built, impressive hood. First-class value. |
| negative: | A bit bulky compared to most other lenses I own. |
| comment: | Interestingly I had exactly the opposite experience to Icemantx in the review two beneath mine. I already endemic a Minolta 100-300 APO and while I institute the image quality to be very expert, I was keen to find something even better without spending an arm and a leg. The Tamron SP 70-300 USD is exactly that lens. Compared direct to the 100-300 APO, the Minolta has a size and weight advantage, but in every other aspect the Tamron out-performs it. I can only think that Icemantx'due south lens was either faulty or back-focusing on his photographic camera, every bit my lens is simply astonishingly precipitous throughout its range, giving noticeably better IQ than every other lens in my 'compared to' list higher up. I recently did a grouping examination of several telephoto lenses, taking numerous identical shots at different apertures and focal lengths and and then doing A-B comparisons on screen at 100%, looking at centres and corners. As the Tamron was the virtually expensive lens in my collection, I expected it to come summit and it didn't disappoint, although other lenses sometimes came close, it was never beaten to top spot at whatever setting by whatever other lens. In my opinion this is a truthful jewel of a lens and as long as it is set upwardly optimally on your camera will produce phenomenally sharp images, which are near a revelation compared to less expensive glass, almost like someone who is slightly brusk-sighted wearing glasses for the first time. Having said that, in hindsight I don't want to give the wrong impression every bit all the lenses in my 'compared to' list are good and the differences, although definitely there, are subtle. If you're not into pixel-peeping and will never print bigger than A4, you're very unlikely to notice any real difference and the Minolta 75-300 North (for example) has virtually the same range and very good image quality for around 1/four of the toll. You pay a lot unfortunately for excellence. Build quality seems very good, colours are first-class, CA is negligible, I've never detected any distortion and flare is very well controlled (the excellent lens hood helps). I'll still keep my 100-300 APO for times when I want to travel light, merely in every other situation I volition be using my Tamron, it is but a better lens. |
| jadawgis732 #10098 date: Apr-x-2012 | |
|---|---|
| sharpness: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I ain this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 55-200 F4-five.6 |
| toll paid: | 359 USD (new) |
| positive: | Build Quality, Sharpness, Features, Toll |
| negative: | Really cannot think of anything within reason |
| comment: | Excellent lens which pairs well with my Sony A33. With all the features (USM focusing, full fourth dimension manual override, Internal Focusing, Focal Length Window, Build Quality) at the price I paid ($409 - $50 mail in rebate-- which was back in my easily less than 10 days after I sent information technology in) I cannot imagine annihilation better. The images are abrupt, the lens feels GREAT in the easily, and I can tell it is quality. I don't have any fear about issues like I would with Sigma lenses and Sony SLT bodies, and I cannot come across the benefit of a lens similar the Sony 70-300G 4.five-5.6 over this lens, even at $300 more. Peachy lens, if yous are on Sony system, go it! |
reviews institute: 54 1 two >>
Source: http://www.dyxum.com/reviews/lenses/Tamron-SP-AF-70-300mm-4-5.6-Di--USD_review595.html
0 Response to "Tamron Sp Af 70-300mm 4-56 Di Usd a-mount Lens Reviews"
Post a Comment