LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Tamron 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical [IF] MACRO

FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive
Thread started 17 May 2008 (Saturday) 13:49   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
PhotoFranz
Goldmember
PhotoFranz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2007
1,626 posts
Chicago, Illinois
[MORE/SHARE]

The new lens was delivered yesterday. My wife and I went to an ethnic festival in Skokie Illinois today and I shot a few test shots.

I bought this lens to be a vacation "outside" walk around lens and I think it will do VERY well in that role. The lens feels very substantial and seems to be very good quality. The zoom and focus rings both have a nice feel, but I mostly AF anyway. I am not a pro in any way, my photography is for my family and I, mostly vacations and family functions. The lens was $537 at BuyDig.com and was delivered 3 days after purchase.

Here are 8 shots from today and then a link to 15 in the original size with intact EXIF. These are straight out of the camera, except for resizing for the web, there is no P.P.. Also, they were shot at around Noon with a bright, high sun. LOL, what I usually shoot in.

Here is a link to the 15 shot set on my Flickr account. Hey, it is NOT "L" glass, but for my purposes and $537 I am very happy so far. Link: http://www.flickr.com ...z/sets/721576051045​96044/external link


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...00010820_51745ae7cd​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm4.static.fl​ickr.com ...99185261_66e12deeb5​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...00011038_7bbc8ea350​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...00011142_2f16bed634​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...00011358_e993a62624​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...00011434_4605933306​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...99185797_f0a4462a46​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...00011576_63d7648f60​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Post #1, May 17, 2008 13:49:22


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/photofranz/external link
Camera: Fujifilm HS 50 EXR 42X zoom, Sigma Electronic Flash EF 500 DG ST, Vegas Movie Studio 9.0, Noiseware Standard Edition, Photoshop Elements-11, Photomatix Essentials. I am here to learn from the experts.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Permagrin
High Priestess of all I survey
Permagrin's Avatar
Joined Aug 2006
77,877 posts
day dreamin'
[MORE/SHARE]

I just bought this lens today...after returning my second 100-400L for softness at 400mm.

I've not had a chance to do more than the preliminary focus test (just making sure it wasn't soft) and a couple of quick snaps. But I like what I see. And the VC really seems to work nicely.

it is a little slow focusing and noisy but those are my only complaints so far :)

Post #2, May 17, 2008 16:07:14


.. It's Permie's world, we just live in it! ~CDS

LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Wow Lisa. You sold tossed the forum-beloved 1-4 IS for this 3rd party f6.3 superzoom? :lol:

Post #3, May 17, 2008 16:38:05 as a reply to Permagrin's post 30 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Permagrin
High Priestess of all I survey
Permagrin's Avatar
Joined Aug 2006
77,877 posts
day dreamin'
[MORE/SHARE]

LightRules wrote in post #5543985external link
Wow Lisa. You sold tossed the forum-beloved 1-4 IS for this 3rd party f6.3 superzoom? :lol:

I've tried two of those blasted lenses with horrid results at 400. I just wanted a walk around (for when I don't want to carry the 300 2.8 on one camera and the 70-200 on the other). The tamron was sharper than any of the 100-400's that I tested. I even bought one of the 100-400's (again) and brought it home and tested it with the focus chart...it was backfocusing across the board and soft at 5.6 on 400mm.

Post #4, May 17, 2008 16:40:14


.. It's Permie's world, we just live in it! ~CDS

LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotoFranz
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
PhotoFranz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2007
1,626 posts
Chicago, Illinois
[MORE/SHARE]

I had big back-focus problems with both Sigma lenses I owned, the 17-70 and he 70-300 APO. I had both corrected and now love the 17-70. I sold the 70-300 now that I have the Tamron. I took a lot of shots of fences at angles and things and so far, see no focus issues. Ok, it IS softer than any "L" lens, but for my uses, it is pretty damn good. Any comments on the photos I posted?

Post #5, May 17, 2008 17:06:40


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/photofranz/external link
Camera: Fujifilm HS 50 EXR 42X zoom, Sigma Electronic Flash EF 500 DG ST, Vegas Movie Studio 9.0, Noiseware Standard Edition, Photoshop Elements-11, Photomatix Essentials. I am here to learn from the experts.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
PhotoFranz
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
PhotoFranz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2007
1,626 posts
Chicago, Illinois
[MORE/SHARE]

Don't get me wrong, I do not think this is the lens for you birders out there. However, as just a serious hobbiest, I am pretty happy with the results I am getting. I shot this RWBB the other day at Montrose Harbor Bird Sanctuary in Chicago, Illinois.

It was an overcast, windy day and I shot this at ISO 400. No crop, a little levels adjustment and a touch of USM.

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...21342786_699011d276​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Post #6, May 25, 2008 09:10:00


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/photofranz/external link
Camera: Fujifilm HS 50 EXR 42X zoom, Sigma Electronic Flash EF 500 DG ST, Vegas Movie Studio 9.0, Noiseware Standard Edition, Photoshop Elements-11, Photomatix Essentials. I am here to learn from the experts.

LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotoFranz
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
PhotoFranz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2007
1,626 posts
Chicago, Illinois
[MORE/SHARE]

Here is a hand held grab shot out my back door the other day. It is heavily cropped, and PP'd. I still think it is pretty good. The Cardinal was sitting pretty far away on my power line. The VC makes a big difference over my old Sigma 70-300.

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://farm3.static.fl​ickr.com ...36640919_b45be85e4f​_o.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Post #7, May 30, 2008 17:05:46


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/photofranz/external link
Camera: Fujifilm HS 50 EXR 42X zoom, Sigma Electronic Flash EF 500 DG ST, Vegas Movie Studio 9.0, Noiseware Standard Edition, Photoshop Elements-11, Photomatix Essentials. I am here to learn from the experts.

LOG IN TO REPLY
mrfourcows
Goldmember
mrfourcows's Avatar
Joined May 2006
2,108 posts
london
[MORE/SHARE]

just thought i'd put this here, its a review of the tamron vs the ef L 28-300mm:
http://review.fengniao​.com/74/743815.htmlexternal link

its in chinese though, so you'll need to translate.

Post #8, Jun 20, 2008 11:42:28 as a reply to PhotoFranz's post 20 days earlier.


gear | flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotoFranz
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
PhotoFranz's Avatar
Joined Jan 2007
1,626 posts
Chicago, Illinois
[MORE/SHARE]

Yeah, that is pretty hard to read. I cannot even find a button to push to translate it. One IMPORTANT thing to remember though, I paid under $600 for the Tamron and on a GOOD day, the Canon L is about $2300. Being retired, I guess I have to live with the lower IQ. LOL, that sounds bad. I mean a lower IQ on the lens, not me!

Post #9, Jun 20, 2008 19:40:59


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/photofranz/external link
Camera: Fujifilm HS 50 EXR 42X zoom, Sigma Electronic Flash EF 500 DG ST, Vegas Movie Studio 9.0, Noiseware Standard Edition, Photoshop Elements-11, Photomatix Essentials. I am here to learn from the experts.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Southswede
Senior Member
Joined Nov 2004
938 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

With my 40D, I have the 17-55 2.8 IS and the 70-200 2.8 L IS. But I also have the Tamron, for when i just want to walk around, carrying next to nothing.
I kinda like the Tamron.........

Post #10, Jun 20, 2008 20:38:02




LOG IN TO REPLY
mrfourcows
Goldmember
mrfourcows's Avatar
Joined May 2006
2,108 posts
london
[MORE/SHARE]

try this for translation:
http://babelfish.yahoo​.com ...=zt_en&btnTrUrl=Tra​nslateexternal link

still very hard to read though - problems with the difference in language structure and their metaphors.

basically, the tamron does better at 28mm while the canon takes the cake at 300mm. the reviewer personally chooses the tamron, but i guess its still an individualistic choice: would you be willing to put in 2+k for a general all purpose lens? especially so when you've already got other more specialized lenses to cover the same focal lengths?

Post #11, Jun 21, 2008 12:00:44 as a reply to Southswede's post 15 hours earlier.


gear | flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Kenski
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2004
724 posts
Va Beach, Va
[MORE/SHARE]
banned

I had this lens and IT IS A GOOD starter lens. I sold it about 6 months later and bought the 70-200 2.8 IS. This lens is good IF YOU DONT THINK YOU ARE GOING TO DO MUCH WITH PHOTOGRAPHY!!! If I though I was going to do alot with photography, then I wouldn't waste my money.

Post #12, Jun 21, 2008 12:08:25


[highlight]40D, 30D, 300D 10-22mm 15mm 17-40mm 24-70mm 50mm 60mm 70-200 IS, 100-400 IS[/highlight]
"One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten photos out of focus is an experimentation, one hundred photos out of focus is a style."
Kenski Photographyexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Permagrin
High Priestess of all I survey
Permagrin's Avatar
Joined Aug 2006
77,877 posts
day dreamin'
[MORE/SHARE]

Kenski wrote in post #5764869external link
I had this lens and IT IS A GOOD starter lens. I sold it about 6 months later and bought the 70-200 2.8 IS. This lens is good IF YOU DONT THINK YOU ARE GOING TO DO MUCH WITH PHOTOGRAPHY!!! If I though I was going to do alot with photography, then I wouldn't waste my money.

this isn't the same lens...it's new as of Jan this year...and frankly I've got a whole aresenal of lenses and like this one very much. It's a bit slow to gain focus in low light but it's sharp for an ultra zoom. Perfect for walk around lens.

Post #13, Jun 21, 2008 12:13:20


.. It's Permie's world, we just live in it! ~CDS

LOG IN TO REPLY
sgogula
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2007
738 posts
Portland, OR
[MORE/SHARE]

seems to be very good..

here is google translation of the above comparision page..

http://translate.googl​e.com ...en&ie=UTF8&sl=zh-CN&tl=enexternal link

Post #14, Jun 21, 2008 12:16:53 as a reply to Kenski's post 8 minutes earlier.


Canon 50D|70-200 2.8 IS II |Sigma 17-50 OS| Canon 85mm 1.8| Canon 50mm f1.8 II |430 EX II Speedlite| Manfrotto 055XPROB| Cullmann head| Adobe CS5

LOG IN TO REPLY
casaaviocar
Senior Member
casaaviocar's Avatar
Joined Jun 2006
885 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

My Tamron was terrible from 200-300 and 28-50. Also not very good wide open. I took photos with it and my 80-200, there was no comparison. I sold it.

Post #15, Jun 21, 2008 12:34:58


Rule books are paper they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal -ekg-

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
20,157 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tamron 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD Aspherical [IF] MACRO
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00091 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
735 guests, 558 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is MoMoPhoto32250

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.