Lyndon Guy |
Tamron AF 28-300 f3.5-6.3 Planning a trip to Yellowstone this summer - planning to take my Nikon N80 and ONE lens, well two maybe, but preferably one. I'm a long term amateur, but no pro and probably don't need pro glass. Any thoughts on the lens above for general pretty scenery, wildlife, wife and kids (speaking of wildlife) sort of use? Are there better alternative in the under $500 range I should consider? Anybody used this lens? The reviews I read seem mixed...
|
|
|
||
Charles W. Craft |
I've been using a Tamron 28-300 for about a year, usually on a Pentax ZX-5n. I use it for hiking, mostly trail photos and scenery. Probably over 150 rolls though it, out in all weather except pouring rain, no problems. I finally did a brief test last week - here's what it looked like, along with some impressions: At 28mm it looks decent, but a little soft on objects WAY out there. I've taken a number of scenic panoramics at 28 and always thought my 17-28 Pentax fisheye was sharper at 17, with twice the coverage . Should look OK to the average casual photographer. 100mm it looks as good as my Pentax 80-200 f2.8 lens. 200mm it's a little softer than the Pentax, but still real nice. And the Pentax is big and heavy and can't realistically be carried mounted with the camera suspended from its strap. It also cost 4X the Tamron price. 300mm still looks OK, but its really hard to handhold 300. The tripod shots look A LOT better than most of my handheld ones. The f6.3 max aperture at 300 also hurts in any less than "cloudy bright" conditions. I put a Kenko 7 element 2X converter on the Tamron. At effective lengths of 400 and 600mm, it was really getting noticeably fuzzy. Forget enlargements unless the subject stands out from the background. But it was still comparable to my Vivitar 500mm mirror lens that I never use because the "f8" Vivitar is really about f16, and not real sharp. Worth keeping the converter in the pack just in case. The Tamron won't autofocus on the converter except at short lengths; the Pentax will (as expected from the maximum apertures). The Kenko converter is real decent. I tried it on the Pentax 80-200 and the images were just fine. All in all, I'm glad I bought the Tamron and it will remain my primary field lens when I'm hiking. (A 50 1.7 usually rides in the pack for early AM in the woods, and I take the fisheye if I'm expecting any mountain scenery.) I saw a couple user reviews that said the mounting was fragile, and while I haven't abused it, the UV filter's dug though the mud a couple times when I've slipped with the camera around my neck, so it can't be THAT fragile. All in all, it's one of my better purchases. If I broke it, I'd buy another immediately - don't know what I'd do without it.
|
|
|
||
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |