Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 LD Macro Pics !

The Tammy is a cool lens, loved it...but it is starting to sound like steam train when focusing....Nice pics!

link?

I wouldn't take much notice of the the photography review rating.It's a rating made up of lots of individual votes from people that (mostly) haven't used more than one of these lenses
The sigma apo is the best of those models and get's lots of praise from owners on this forum.Despite being slightly less sharp than the tamron at the long end it's a better overall lens-it's better in every other aspect.

I ALSO am considering in the tamron for that price. They have it here BRAND NEW for under 100USD! My friend has this lens, though she only uses the shorter end (under 200) her pics look flawless...hows the AF? is it fast? I tried the quantaray jsut to haev a idea what it was like to try a 70-300, and the quantaray took waht seemed like forever to focus....really looking forward to see some more shots and here more about it...is it another 50mm 1.8? great lens for little bit of money?

I like my Tammy too... for the money. I paid $69.00 for mine. It does suffer the purple CA, but hey. I just won't take pics of tree branches against a sky with it.

The AF is noisy as hell though, eh?

I cant say if its better against other lens or not as I have never used any other long lens but this ... but just am fussy I got a lens that I can take good shots with whichout spending $$$$$$$$$$

now I want to work on a shorter lens but dunno what to go for so back to analysising it all again :}}}

Here are several info links and my take on the inexpensive 75-300mm or 70-300mm landscape for Canon 1.6 crop DSLR bodies.

This class includes the following lenses:

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2
Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG macro

User testimonials for the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
http://www.fredmiranda​.com …t=18&sort=7&cat​=27&page=2
I could not find a Imatest review of this lens, but not many users are keen on this lens, especially above 200mm.

Imatest results for Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2
http://www.eospix.com/​content-25.html

User testimonials for the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2
http://www.fredmiranda​.com …=254&sort=7&cat​=43&page=1

Imatest results for Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG macro
http://www.photozone.d​e …sigma_70300_456​/index.htm
There are no user testimonials at FredMiranda.com for this lens.

All of these relatively inexpensive lenses have meaningful performance issues. But based on this info, and other info, I purchased the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2.

It seems to be the only one that works over the entire focal length range with acceptable center and edge sharpness. Admittedly, you really have to really stop the Tamron down to get it to cooperate (at all focal lengths), but at some lens setting, even at 300mm you can get a significantly sharp image at both the center and the edge.

The Sigma has very good performance at 70 to 200mm, at almost any aperture, but at 300mm the edge sharpness is very marginal at all apertures.

The Canon seems to provide a reasonable performance at 70 and 200, just not as good as the Sigma, but like the Sigma it is very marginal at 300mm.

Others will likely look at this same info and data and make a much different decision, based on what might be important to them.

One other factor, the Tamron is by far the least expensive lens of the three, especially since the lens hood is included, that increases the value, and were compromises must be made, as with this class of lenses, value seems very appropriate to insert into the mix.

As a side note, moving up to the much more expensive Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens does not change this much.

Imatest results for the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
http://www.photozone.d​e …non_75300_456is​/index.htm and
http://www.eospix.com/​content-28.html

User testimonials for the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
http://www.fredmiranda​.com …t=18&sort=7&cat​=27&page=2

The much more expensive Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM seems to be quite a different story, as everyone loves this lens and it has very good test results at all focal lengths. But it also cost 3 to 5 times that of the three cited at the begining of this post.

Imatest results for the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
http://www.photozone.d​e …non_70300_456is​/index.htm

User testimonials for the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
http://www.fredmiranda​.com …=294&sort=7&cat​=27&page=2

Enjoy! Lon

Lon, thank you so much for taking the time to type out this thoughtful response. It is very helpful to me. I know there are compromises if you can't afford the more expensive lenses (which right now our budget is really crunched). I just was wanting to know more about what to expect.

When you say you really have to stop the Tamron down, what f-stop range are you talking about? If I went with the Tamron, would I still be able to stop action (say with animals) on a cloudy day, which we have much of here in the Pacific Northwest? (Particularly in the 200-300 mm range) That wouldn't be the only use for this lens, but it is one of them.

BTW this is with the Rebel XT. I have the Tamron 28-74 f2.8 and love it. Also an 85 f1.8.

Thank you,

Jessica

From looking at the test reports on the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2, to get good center and edge sharpness at 70mm and 200mm you will need to stop down to F8, and near 300mm you will need to stop down to F11.

The Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG macro will be a lot more flexible with regard to wider apertures at 70mm and 200mm, but it never gets sharp at the edges at 300mm regardless of F#. So, this lens to me seems more like a pretty nice 70-200mm lens that provides marginal use at 300mm. But, at 200mm and below it is a better lens than the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2, if larger lens openings must be used.

The Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM seems to not have any strong suit, and is the most expensive. The hood for this Canon lens costs about 1/4 or 1/3 of the total cost of the Tamron (that includes a hood).

The other part of the question, with regard to the limited light in the Pacific Northwest and the ability to stop action, is much harder to quantify. Certainly low light and F8 or F11 may provide difficulty.

A perfect solution for your location and subject tastes may require lenses that are significantly more expensive, such as the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. Also carefully note that this is a different lens than the Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM. The Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM is not regarded so higly as the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, yet costs about the same.

If you go with one of the inexpensive lenses you can at least choose the nature of your limitation.

Enjoy! Lon

Well if don't like the Quantarary 70-300mm lens, I dont think you will like the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2, as they seem to be the same lens. Just look at the Quantarary 70-300mm in this ebay ad:

http://cgi.ebay.com …ZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcm​dZViewItem

and compare it to the image of the Tamron at:

http://www.eospix.com/​content-25.html

In addition, the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2 seems like a very good value and a decent lens, if used within it's limitations. But, it certainly not the grand bargain the Canon 50mm F1.8 is. The 50mm F1.8 is not shackled with as many significant limitations as the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2.

Enjoy! Lon

Thank you very much, Lon! Once again, very helpful. I have also been looking at the Tamron 28-300... wonder if anyone has compared the Tamron 28-300 vs. the Tamron 70-300 in the 100-300 ranges? It would be sort of redundant for me in the lower end, because I have the Tamron 28-75 f2.8; but just a thought. It would make more sense for me to go with a lens in the 70-300 range probably.

Jessica

I have not researched the Tamron 28-300. I had already researched the 70-300 offerings before I made my recent purchase of the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2.

But, my quick take:
If you think the limitations on a $150.00 Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-f5.6 LD Macro 1:2 lens are significant, just wait till you see the limitations on a $150.00 Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DI XR. If the price stays about the same, and the zoom range dramatically increases, expect optical performance to plummet.

Unless you have several thousand dollars to spend, or will accept pretty pathetic optical performance, I would forget about 28-300 zooms. In fact, I suspect even 28-300 zooms that cost several thousand dollars to also be saddled with some significant optical compromises.

Enjoy! Lon

Yup, that's what I thought. I do think the Tamron 70-300 is the most affordable for me right now anyway, and maybe later can branch out.

Thanks Lon!

Jessica

Have you done anything such as insects or anything else up really close to see how the edges look there? I have been thinking about the Tamron as a reasonably priced alternative instead of the 150mm Sigma macro as an example. Dollars are a consideration as well and what you have shown here so far is really good.

Are we talking about the DI version?
Rgds
Pat