Customer Reviews

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Ultra Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

5 star:		(21)
4 star:		(19)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I love taking photos, but I hate carrying lots of equipment when photography is not the focus of my journey, so I looked to find a lens that was light, inexpensive, a useful focal range and decent sharpness given all of the above. I believe the Tamron fits the bill.

Although this lens will not win any points with 'L'-series purists, I found it to be a very useful - and lightweight - lens. Sure, it's slow... Sure - it has a plastic mount... Sure - it's not as sharp as a lot of lenses with smaller zoom ranges and bigger price tags... But for most people who aren't looking for poster-sized enlargements, a lens that won't break your shoulder or your bank account like the Tamron is a good fit. I have used this lens for a few weeks now, and have compared the results to the excellent Tamron 28-75 2.8 XR Di, the Canon 50mm 1.8 (the 'plastic fantastic'), and the kit lens. It does lack the tack-sharpness of the 50mm and the 28-75, but it is still very acceptable. The reach is what will 'wow' you about the lens. Outdoors in decent light you can really pull your subject up close. In a photo taken from the 6th story of a beach hotel, I was able to clearly read a standard beach umbrella-rental sign that was approx. 500 yards away.
Indoors, this lens is just too slow to be useful at full zoom, but does reasonably well between 28-100mm with built-in flash (just be sure to remove the lens hood or it will shadow the lower part of the frame) and even better with an external flash (I use the EX550).
The focus is quick and quiet in decent lighting, but it will hunt in darker scenes.
In short, if you want a lens that offers reasonable sharpness, an incredible focal range, lightness and compactness at an attractive price, then consider this lens. You may find, as I did, that it will let you take that long lens with you instead of leaving your gear behind... I would much rather have a picture that may not be 'as sharp' than the one I did not take because I left the two pound lens behind.

(Tamron also makes this lens available for Canon and Pentax digital SLRs, for the same price.)

This new digital SLR-friendly zoom lens from Tamron is a great way to acquire a high-quality zoom lens for a fraction of the cost if you bought from the camera maker (e.g., Nikkor). Tamron claims this is world's "smallest and lightest" zoom lens for the focal range. I have no idea if that's true. It's small and lightweight indeed, about the same size as the DX lens bundled with the Nikon D70 but feels lighter in the hand. To my eyes it's a plastic lens, but this made-in-Japan lens looks and feels solid. It has all the bells and whistles of a modern lens: XR, LD, asperical, plus macro capability. In real world shooting I'm very happy with the result, and I really don't think buying an official Nikkor lens would make much of a difference. Two things to keep in mind is, 1) as long as you buy a namebrand lens (Tamron, Sigma, and maybe Vivitar) you are getting a good deal, and 2) the marginal increase in lens quality (perceived or real) from the camera maker is extremely unlikely to improve pictures by any discernible amount. Give Ansel Adams a disposable camera and he would still take better pics than you and me, period. As long as you have a high quality, capable lens like this Tamron, you are armed with all the gear you need to NOT miss a great picture opportunity. The only ingredient nobody can sell, is your creativity. (Unfortunately the latter is what I lack and try to improve. For now, at least the Tamron is giving me the right tool.)

For digital Nikon SLRs, the 1.5 "magnification" factor (or crop factor) means the effective focal length of this Tamron is about 43-460mm in 35mm equivalent.

In short, this is a really top-quality lens that any Nikon D70 enthusiast should consider. It's a lot bang for the buck, and it's even made in Japan unlike many Nikon official lenses which are made in sweatshops in Southeast Asia.

When I got my dslr, I did not get the "kit" lens. I wanted immediately to be able to take both macro and zoom shots, and I didn't have money for more than one good quality lens. So I researched and read reviews online and when I bought my new camera, I got the Tamron 28-300. I made a great choice. If you buy just one lens; this lens is it.

This lens' macro shots are clear and detailed. For example, in a picture I recently took of my Pomeranian each individual hair that sticks up is visible and clear, strand by strand.

The versatility of the lens allows me to take landscape pictures, photos of birds in my yard, portraits, nearly whatever strikes me. Every time they are crisp and the colors are good.

I love this lens; it is still my primary lens.

Got this lens for my wife along with a Nikon D-50 just prior to a 2 week trip to Africa. Initial impressions were that the lens was very lightweight and compact and gave an amazingly full range of wide-angle to zoom capability. On the plus side, this lense stayed on my wife's camera all the time and she got some great shots that I missed while I was fumbling to change lenses. On the bad side, I swapped cameras with her one evening and found the lens to be less than great in low light (ie required long shutter times) at even modest zoom settings and even with ISO set up to 400 on the camera. I found that shutter speeds got so slow that I could not handhold the camera without blur from lens shake (1/30 or slower) while my other Nikon with the 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6 was still taking good shots. Also, I found that on the digital camera with its 1.5x lens multiplier that the 28mm wide angle end of the lens was not wide enough for some of those vast African landscapes.
Net, net -- if I were on a camping trip or vacation where having a single lens was important for light weight and no fuss, I would use this lens, but if I were doing critical photography, I would probably bring a pair of faster lenses to cover the same range.

(Note: Tamron also makes this lens available for Nikon and Pentax digital SLRs, for the same price. In fact I have the Nikon version since I own a D70, but I thought my experience with this lens could help Canon d-SLR users as well. Please don't flame me!)

This new digital SLR-friendly zoom lens from Tamron is a great way to acquire a high-quality zoom lens for a fraction of the cost if you bought from the camera maker (e.g., Canon). Tamron claims this is world's "smallest and lightest" zoom lens for the focal range. I have no idea if that's true. It's small and lightweight indeed. To my eyes it's an all-plastic lens, but this made-in-Japan lens looks and feels solid. It has all the bells and whistles of a modern lens: XR, LD, asperical, plus macro capability. In real world shooting I'm very happy with the result, and I really don't think buying an official Canon lens would make much of a difference. Two things to keep in mind is, 1) as long as you buy a namebrand lens (Tamron, Sigma, and maybe Vivitar) you are getting a good deal, and 2) the marginal increase in lens quality (perceived or real) from the camera maker is extremely unlikely to improve pictures by any discernible amount. Give Ansel Adams a disposable camera and he would still take better pics than you and me, period. As long as you have a high quality, capable lens like this Tamron, you are armed with all the gear you need to NOT miss a great picture opportunity. The only ingredient nobody can sell, is your creativity. (Unfortunately the latter is what I lack and try to improve. For now, at least the Tamron is giving me the right tool.)

For the Digital Rebel, the 1.6 "magnification" factor (or crop factor) means the effective focal length of this Tamron is about 45-480mm in 35mm equivalent. Whoa!

In short, this is a really top-quality lens that any Digital Rebel enthusiast should consider. It's a lot bang for the buck, and it's even made in Japan unlike many Canon official lenses which are made in sweatshops in Southeast Asia.

[This is a modification of a previous review]

I want to first comment on the manufacturers claimed focal lengths. I originally purchased the 28-300mm lens as an all purpose utility lens to go with my 20D. At the time I purchased it, I noticed the focal length wasn't as long as expected, but assumed it was probably a 10X, and that it was actually 280mm. A recent test proved it to be very much short of even that amount. I took several shots of a fur animal against a white background, w/ several DVD's sitting beneath and to the side of the object. With the Tamron set to 300mm, all the way out, then with a 75-300mm Canon set dead center of the 200mm mark and the Canon 70-200mm set to 200mm, all the way out. Framing and size of everything in the picture are identical. At this point I believed this to be a 28-200mm lens. However, I recently tested Canon's 28-200mm lens, hoping to get a little better autofocusing performance in lowlight situations. First, the 200mm position on the Canon 28-200mm was not comparable, it was a wider angle than the Tamron 28-300mm and than the other Canon's set at 200mm, that I had tested previously. This has led me to the conclusion that these "Beefed Up Wide Angles" just won't zoom in quite as close as their similarly rated telephoto zoom counterparts.

I have modified my rating and my review, because I have decided the lens should be reviewed for what it is - a mid to low priced utility lens - and should NOT be compared to my high end Canon lenses. That is not a fair comparison, whether it is by focal length or anything else. However, it is imperitive to ALWAYS check the assumed focal lengths against anything else you may have, so you know what you're getting. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what the numbers written on the lens are (they are guidance), what matters is the usefulness of the lens.

Pros:
- It comes with a lens hood (very nice) - the Canon 28-200mm doesn't and wouldn't you know it, on my first application, I needed it. Overhead stage lights caused some horrendous glare that would have been completely eliminated by a lens hood).
- Despite my earlier criticism, within it's class, the Autofocus is decent (The Canon 28-200mm didn't perform a whole lot - maybe slightly - better than the Tamron).
- The range isn't what it's purported to be, but it's still a very versatile lens and does have a decent zoom range despite this fact.
- Exterior lens contruction is very solid for this price range (the Canon 28-200mm isn't bad, but probably not quite as solid).
- The price

Cons:
- Plastic lens mounting (the Canon 28-200mm has a metal mounting).
- The rotation direction for zooming is inverted. (I am not a Nikon user, however, it APPEARS that Tamron manufactures these lenses to first be compatible with Nikon cameras - it looks like a Nikon except that it says "Tamron" on it. it appears that they just add a Canon chip and mounting to an existing construction - which would certainly make SENSE for cost reasons.) Whatever the reason, you have to turn it the opposite way from what you are used to if you use mostly Canon lenses, and this can mess you up in the heat of the moment (I photo stage action - bikini, lingerie and fashion shows and contests - I do photo shoots of the models with the good lenses, which is the majority of my time, then I use the cheaper equipment for the shows, which are often in the city, not always in the nicest areas. Places where the really expensive stuff WILL NOT go...)
- The lens cap is a bit of a pain. I finally figured out why they made it this way, because it makes it a little less difficult to get it off when the lens hood is on. BUT... this does not make it any less of a problem when the hood is NOT on - it can easily be knocked off by a simple brushing against the side of it, when the hood is not on the lens.
- The aperture on the high end is f/6.3. On the Canons in this price range it is f/5.6, which is already a pretty slow lens. Tamron should consider a future upgrade to a faster lens. Even if they have to bump the price by a few bucks. Within reason it would be worth it.

To explain the construction - I looked very carefully at the materials of this one and the Canon 28-200mm. It's very clear to me that Tamron has saved their money in the area of mounting and added a little more in the exterior construction, plus they added a lens hood. Canon saved their money on the exterior construction (though it is good - much better than those cheap throwaways that come with the Rebel DSLR's - so don't get me wrong on that), and but a little more toward the mounting. So, which is more important for your application? You have to think that one through.

I have upgraded this review to 4 stars for the following reasons:
- My focal length criticisms are not exclusive to this lens or manufacturer for similar prosucts of similar price, regardless of manufacturer.
- The Autofocus criticisms were more directly geared to my experience with $1500 lenses. And that just plain is not a fair comparison at all. Compared to similar lenses - this lens performs very well.

Why four and not five stars - the plastic lens mount, and the fact that I wouldn't rate any "economical" (and for a 35mm camera lens this IS economical) product five stars as long as it shows signs of being an economical product, and this does (not to harp on the mount, but...)

Finally decided to buy this lens for my Canon 20D and after 1000 shots of all types I know I made the right choice for a lens I don't have to change all the time.

There's no subsitute for a few prime lenses of known good quality when you know what you are after and don't mind taking them all with you, but for this price, the Tamron is a little gem IMO. f2.8 would be nice... but at what price ?

I reserve 5 stars for something near perfect and that is mighty hard to achieve for anything IMO 8-) 4 stars makes me very happy though..

Just wanted to add this .... This was the quickest rebate return I ever applied for ! The way it SHOULD be for all of them 8-) BTW, now over 2000 shots taken with this lens and I'm still happy.

Update: Now at over 6000 shots taken and it's still a gem to own ! No problems to report.

To put what you are about to read in context, I am an accredited photojournalist and have won several awards for my photography. I originally bought this non-VC Tamron 28-300 mm lens when I bought my Nikon D-100. I was on a tight budget and the camera store recommended it, so I took their advice. I have since upgraded my cameras several times, now shooting primarily with a Nikon D3, with a D300 as a second camera body. I also have several Nikon lenses, for limited-use applications. The problem is a lack of a broad range, Nikon brand zoom lens for their full frame FX sensor Nikon cameras (as opposed to DX lenses for the smaller chip). Even though I never use my D100 anymore, most of my shots taken with the D3 are taken in combination with my trusty Tamrom 28-300mm lens. It consistently takes good photos. I made a huge mistake a few months ago by buying Tamron's new VC version of this lens. That lens is a disaster. After missing several easy shots at my daughter's graduation due to the lens not focusing (instead, it hunted back and forth), I took the lens back to the store -- only to learn that other shooters had returned their Tamron VC 28-300mm lenses too. Another of my fellow journalists returned his for the same reason. He is still peeved that he blew an opportunity to get a $300 Nikon rebate on a combination D300 camera and lens purchase, because he chose to buy just the camera body and the Tamron VC lens instead.

This non-VC Tamron 28-300mm Nikon-mount lens is great if you want or need to travel light by bringing only your camera with a single, attached lens. It has a great zoom range and auto-focuses well. Note that there are some Nikon models that this lens will not auto-focus with, so be sure to verify your application before ordering one.

Granted this lens is not great in low light with older cameras, but the newer Nikons (including the D3, D300, D700 and others) have terrific low light sensitivity so the lens' low light capabilities do not matter that much. Simply set these camera bodies in their Auto-ISO mode, attach this Tamron lens and you'll be good to go for most situations. Using a relatively high shutter speed, my Nikon D3 and my aging Tamron lens, I was able to shoot sharp shots of a motorcycle stunt-jumping exhibition outside of the Palms hotel (in Las Vegas) at night, during the recent SEMA Show. The motorcycles, as they jumped high in the air, were lit only by a couple of spotlights. The results were amazing.

I have repeatedly asked Nikon reps for such a lens from Nikon for use with their new, full frame cameras (D3 and D700). They tell me they cannot make one that would sell for a low enough price that people would be willing to pay. Go figure. Perhaps someday Nikon will listen and make such a lens available. In the meantime, especially considering there is now a $50 rebate on this Tamron lens, I am tempted to buy another of these for when (or if) mine finally wears out.

Just recently I got my first DSLR (Digital Rebel) and I needed a lens to go with it. I heard that there were 3 28-300mm lenses on the market, one made by Canon, one made by Sigma, and one made by Tamron. The Canon lens was WAY to expensive. The Sigma lens I also heard had trouble communicating with some of the Canon EOS systems. That left the Tamron. First of all, it's got an enormous focal range, which makes it great for sports. Second, the focusing is incredibly fast in good lighting, though I've had some problems with it indoors. Third, it has great image quality. Forget what people say about it having "less sharpness". It works fine. Also, the macro is incredible. Through the full focal range it has, if I can remeber correctly, a minimum focusing distance of 16 inches. I would, however, recommend getting a fast indoor lens with it, such as the Sigma 28-50mm f2.8.

When I bought this lens used I was not expecting much. It's a 28-300 zoom that's relatively slow on the telephoto end but I thought it might an alright lens for backpacking or in situations in which I didn't want to lug my heavy lenses around that cover an equivalent focal length range. This lens is quite remarkable for the price. The image quality is above average although there is some drop in the sharpness along the edges and it occasionally produces soft images. There is also some chromatic aberration at the long end when shot wide open. Overall, I've been very pleased with this lens. I don't use it quite as much as a I used because of the nature of the work I've been shooting lately so I passed it off to my girlfriend for the time being.

All things considered, this is a very solid lens. If you are looking for top-notch quality, this probably isn't your lens. If you are looking to save your back from lugging around a bag of lenses on a long trip, you might want to consider this lens.