Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD (1 Viewer)

Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD
Anyone use this before? I have one coming in the mail. Will get it this week.
I have read many reviews and they say it is very comparable to Nikon quality. Some people say its better and some say its worse. Just about equal on both sides of the argument. I like the price better and I like trying new things.

I am also getting a Tiffen 62mm UV Protection Filter also.

Do you know how it compares to the:
AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED

Nice

I got the lens yesterday. I like it.

The hood is a lot larger then my Nikon (18-135) or Sigma (70-300) lens hoods.

The image stabilization works well. For the frame to move you have to try to move it. It does not move at all with normal shakes.

If this lens could have a macro function installed that would be nice, but I would rather buy a macro specific lens anyways.

I will take it out this weekend and see how it preforms.

Hello - sorry to bump this thread after a few months, but can I ask how you're finding the Tamron? Its on my list for a new lens, and the price is very appealing now. I've just bought a Canon 550D with a 50mm prime, and want a walk-round lens which can also pull in some reasonable shots of close stuff seen from hides or in hedges, field boundaries etc. For more dedicated wildlife stuff I'm looking at either a) digiscoping with my Kowa TNS-2 or b) getting a 2nd hand big telephoto or fixed prime.
Thanks.

Hi,

I've been using this lens with my 7D for a several months now and I'm very satisfied with it.

It is sharp - hands down sharper than 75-300 Tamron (which had borrowed for a few days) and similar cheaper options. Actually I was pleasantly surprised by it's performance - even wide open it delivers good results in good light and when stopped down to it's 'sweetspot' (f7.1-f8) than it can be even comparable to Canon's 100-400L (I've also used it for a few outings) in my opinion. (EDIT: It has more chromatic aberrations though if you look at 100% crops). Attached photo of Little Grebe was @ f5.6 for example.

Stabilisation also works very well - the attached Blackbird photo for example is hand-held @ 1/15 and 300mm. Only I find that it consumes battery life quite a lot (but can't compare if more than usually IS systems consume).

AF speed and accuracy is also OK - of course it is not excellent and on par with primes (but surely better than cheaper xx-300mm zoom lenses - and it's silent) but I can live with that. At least I haven't missed many good opportunities because of failing AF. The attached Goshawk photo I think is a good example that it can focus rather good also on fast action shots (at least on larger birds).

So overall conclusion is that it is very good lens for the price - especially if you know what you want and understand it's limitations (mainly the lack of reach). I wanted a rather compact, not very pricey telephoto walk-around lens with good optical performance to document my bird sightings and this lens fulfils my needs completely. :t:

P.S. Attached two more images.
Little gull is cropped, @ f5.6 and it was an dull day without much light. AF struggled a little (or maybe I struggled as I'm not that skilled yet in flight shots) in such circumstaces but in the end I managed to get several Ok shots that look good when resized down.
Goldcrest is basically FF shot (cropped edges to 4:3) @f7.1 so if you can get close to the bird and the light is good than the sharpness is also very Ok and you can fill the frame nicely.

CerambyX - thanks very much. Now convinced this is my next lens. Sadly cannot see myself getting quality shots of Goshawks!