Should I buy Tamron 28-300?

Excuse me for my amateur question. I am new in this forum and new to the digital photography.
I am going to purchase a Canon Digital Rebel 350D and I am facing a question which lenses to buy with it.
There are two options:
1. Two lenses: 28-80 and 70-300.
2. Just one Tamron 28-300.
Of course it appears that two lenses in one is better because you don't have to exchange the lenses all the time depending on the situation, but the question is: is there any compromise in quality etc by putting two in one?
Should I better stick with what the majority seems to be doing: having two sets of lenses?
Thank you
Czarek Mart

I'd say a better idea would be the Tamron 28-75 or Sigma 24-70 and the Canon 70-200 f/4L. I have the 28-300, and very rarely use it at the extremes. I certainly would rely on it as my only lens. I have it because it's a good compromise lens (compact and light) for trips to the zoo and mild close up work.

I believe the tamron is ok stopped down to about f8.

I would say a little more, if you're at the extremes. but in the 50-200mm range, f/8 is fine. Even wide open is fine with some careful sharpening. Just keep in mind it is a compromise lens, even the Canon L version in a compromise type lens that may share an eyewatering list with it's siblings, but not the same level of sharpness as less expensive zooms. Let me add that I also have the other Tamron and 70-200 f/4 zoom. I hardly ever use the f/4, but it's not that I don't like it, I just don't take a lot of tele shots.

jfrancho's advice is sound but from your original post I would guess your budget woiuld not stretch to the more expensive 28-70 or even less the Canon 70-200 f4 L.

As you can see I also have the Tamron, I bought it as my first major lens when I got my 300D much as I guess you are looking for.. As you suggest it IS a compromise lens and image quality will not be as good as zooms with less range, having said there are some rubbish cheap zooms out there it could easily beat!

It is pretty good stopped down and centre image is ok, this is an image taken with mine (I keep it despite my other lenses as you never know where you might want to take your camera with only one lens!

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=126539

HAVING SAID ALL THAT... if I was to buy again I would buy an 18-200 or even the Sigma 18-125 as I did miss the wider end ona 1.6 crop body....

By all means get the lens you suggest, but be aware of its limitations. Eventually you will want to move on but I expect you will stil want to keep it!

I assume you didn't get the 350 with the lens kit. That lens is a 18-55. With that lens, although it's not a favorite, you just need something longer for a second lens, but you wouldn't necessarily need the 28-80. I'd save up for the 28-135 IS for $350.

SuzyView

As EOSAddict says, "You will want to keep it," is true. Even though I have better glass, this lens still finds it's way on my camera quite frequently. I did consider $$ when I made my initial recommendation, but it hadn't occured to me that $1K+ was too much, as I've been severely corrupted by the nice folks here! As for testimonial for the 28-300, here is a pic, 55mm @ f/9:

Nice pics jfrancho, remember my perspective on $$$ is actually £££ which means I would pay lots more than you!

Just for ref, latest prices from a decent inline seller in UK is:

Canon 70-200 f4 £478
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 £264

Tamron 28-300 £214 !

I think around here the prices are relatively consistant. I bought the 28-300 used for $330. The 70-200 f/4 used for $475, and the 28-75 was an 'open box return' for $400. To give you a point of reference, those prices are about 1/4 - 1/3 the average mortgage in this area, so yes, it takes a fair amount of disposable income. You'd have to tell me if that's in line with what it's like on your side of the pond.

Don't have a mortgage so couldn't comment

After viewing my wedding photos, I'm done recommending must have L to budget minded consumers -- they simply aren't needed for great photos (but they are nice).

Having used the Tamron 28-200mm it wasn't the best built lens, but I had an earlier gen 2 copy. The 28-300mm is a much better lens, but the 18-200mm I've read is even better!

But if you have the kit lens, and are looking for a Tele reach zoom, I think either the Tamron or Sigma 28-300 would be a fine choice. And they don't break the bank either which is very nice.

I would look for one used on ebay myself, these lenses appear to out their quite often used.

I have an older Tamron 28-200 and was never happy with the resolution at the longer focal lengths.

I "loaned" it to my daughter who loves using it for taking snap shots with her Rebel. It is more useful to her than a couple of L zoom lenses that would cover the same focal length range but be less convenient to carry around.

I wouldn't buy a 28-300 (unless quality has greatly improved) but it might be a perfect lens for my daughter. What do you expect to do with your pictures?

I believe that if you were on a limited budget and could only have one lens for everything you might shoot then the Tamron in question is a fine choice. After all a guy has got to start somewhere.
The lens is quite compact and light yet pretty well built. Focus is accurate and faster than the EF 75-300 IS that my wife had. It does need good light so that you can stop it down to f/8, f/11 is better. Then the images are sharp and contrasty. My Tamron 28-300 served me in great stead while I had it.
I replaced it with two lenses (EF-s 17-85 IS and EF 70-300 DO IS) at about FIVE TIMES the cost of the Tamron.
Do not drive yourself crazy agonizing over this. Just take your best shot and go out and have fun while you learn.

There are two very good reasons to avoid the tamron 28-300

Firstly it's not particularly sharp.Yes it gets great snapshots and some occasional brilliant images (depending on the subject) but most photographers wouldn't be happy with it.

The other thing is that it's not wide at all on a digital body.It would be MUCH better to go for a two lens combo such as the canon EFs18-55 and the sigma 70-300Apo (or similar).This would give you genuine wide angle ability and much better telephoto.
Don't worry about the apparent gap in the zooms between these lenses-you'll allmost never notice it

Skip Souza wrote:
I believe that if you were on a limited budget and could only have one lens for everything you might shoot then the Tamron in question is a fine choice. After all a guy has got to start somewhere.
The lens is quite compact and light yet pretty well built. Focus is accurate and faster than the EF 75-300 IS that my wife had. It does need good light so that you can stop it down to f/8, f/11 is better. Then the images are sharp and contrasty. My Tamron 28-300 served me in great stead while I had it.
I replaced it with two lenses (EF-s 17-85 IS and EF 70-300 DO IS) at about FIVE TIMES the cost of the Tamron.
Do not drive yourself crazy agonizing over this. Just take your best shot and go out and have fun while you learn.

Hear Hear!