Tamron SP AF 70-300 F/4-5.6 Di VC USD Lens for Nikon or canon - £239 @ Amazon

MrRee

If you're after a point and shoot snapshot lens then this would be OK … If you're after a point and shoot snapshot lens then this would be OK .... for serious shooters it will not deliver IMO.For Canon look at the 70-200mm L Glass f4 Lens - an absolute stonker at a bargain price considering the cracking IQ it delivers time and again.Read lessRead more

LOL, got to love these throwaway comments from someone who probably hasn't owned or used the lens.

The truth is that this is an outstanding lens especially for the price. I've owned one. You only have to look at real life examples on POTN to realise this.

The 70-200 L is twice the price of this so you would expect better image quality. You would be surprised how close this Tamron gets though. It's like comparing apples and pears though. One is 70-200 without any image stabilisation, the other is 70-300 with VC and at half the price.
(edited)

chrismarriott66

Just for clarity, it is not an essential requirement that you use a … Just for clarity, it is not an essential requirement that you use a tripod when using this type of lens - regardless of whether it has image stabilisation or not... You just need to make sure that your shutter speed is good enough for the focal length. Generally speaking, the rule is 1/x, where x = focal length. So when shooting at 300mm, you need to make sure that your shutter speed is at least 1/300sec.... this is how you eliminate camera shake at long focal lengths without image stabilisation. Now if you've got really shaky hands, you might need an even faster shutter, say 1/500 maybe.This does also change when you factor in crop sensor cameras, so for example 300mm on crop has the same field of view as a 450-480mm lens on full frame, so you should be thinking about a shutter speed of 1/500 at 300mm on a crop camera (So maybe 1/1000 for shaky handed people). This is easy outside... less so for indoor sports, but this lens isn't ideal for indoor sports. If you need to bump the ISO up - go for it. A sharp shot with a bit of noise is much better than a blurry shot with no noise.Image stabilisation makes the composition of your shot and panning much nicer, and it is also really useful indoors for slower shutter speeds, but it is most definitely possible to shoot at 300mm without image stabilisation, and without a tripod...Read lessRead more

Well said, I use a 100-400mm out doors on a crop without a tripod (shooting aircraft with a tripod wouldn't be that great :D). It did have panning IS on but I did take successful shots without IS. For prop aircraft you looking at a shutter speed of less than 1/500th to get a nice blur. Getting a sharp image is very possible at that shutter speed it just takes alot of practice. Of course your "keeper" rate will be lower... in my case quite a lot lower :D.

Not the best picture but this was shot on a 40D at 340mm @ 1/500. Image is sharp, a little underexposed on my work display but the weather was crap.



Another one even slower again at 400mm @ 1/400



So hand held at long ranges without a tripod is very possible.

(edited)

hb531

What's the differences between this one and Tamron 70-300mm f4/5.6 DI LD … What's the differences between this one and Tamron 70-300mm f4/5.6 DI LD Macro? The second one is only 89.99 at Jessops(http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/66320/Show.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=PLA&utm_term=70-300mm%20f4/5.6%20DI%20LD%20Macro%20(Canon%20AF)%20&gclid=CjwKEAiA-5-kBRDylPG5096R8mASJABqEdm4GFfzrpyy8lenOSHcPF8rJOB3gTh2PUHOqSPrBKLgrhoCrMPw_wcB)Read lessRead more

Massively different. The one you've mentioned is a very basic bottom of the range lens. The one in this post is better due to:
Better optics (lens quality - sharpness, contrast, vignetting, distortion etc), faster focusing and better build quality.

It's like comparing a second hand Kia (I know they're not bad cars!) with a new Audi. Both will get you from A to B (ie same focal range and aperture) but the drive and quality is completely different.

MrRee

70-300 is always a temptation as the range is big .... but it compromises … 70-300 is always a temptation as the range is big .... but it compromises on image quality.There will be a sweet spot at some point in the range and at this point the lens will be amazing - but drift from that and IQ falls.If you're after a point and shoot snapshot lens then this would be OK .... for serious shooters it will not deliver IMO.For Canon look at the 70-200mm L Glass f4 Lens - an absolute stonker at a bargain price considering the cracking IQ it delivers time and again.Read lessRead more

I remember reading a telephoto comparison in my wife's Photoplus magazine last year. The Canon lens scored 87% overall and the Tamron won the test with 90%.
The positives for the Canon were superb image quality, great build quality and constant f/4 aperture. The negatives were that it was relatively expensive (yes it's an L lens) and it was somewhat lacking in telephoto reach. Also stated that lack of IS made handheld shooting a challenge.
The Tamron was praised for its overall superb performance and image quality with the main downside being that it was relatively heavy compared to the other lenses.The Vibration Compensation was also praised.

At £239 this is a great price for this lens. Heat added.

For the 'Happy Snapper' this lens would be just fine but as MrRee has already said for the serious photographer the range of this lens is too great to reach the quality needed at this price.

F/4-5.6 just doesn't do it.

Still, for what it is it's a good buy. Hot from me.

Some seriously misinformed people on here, why the hell do u need a tripod for a 70-200mm L F4 lens? And why would you not recommend a telephoto lens without IS? Please these are just ridiculous comments.

This is a good lens however especially for the price, I've never owned it but have used it.

(edited)

Donkii

Some seriously misinformed people on here, why the hell do u need a … Some seriously misinformed people on here, why the hell do u need a tripod for a 70-200mm L F4 lens? And why would you not recommend a telephoto lens without IS? Please these are just ridiculous comments.This is a good lens however especially for the price, I've never owned it but have used it. Read lessRead more

Must admit couldn't understand the tripod comment

70-300 is always a temptation as the range is big .... but it compromises on image quality.

There will be a sweet spot at some point in the range and at this point the lens will be amazing - but drift from that and IQ falls.

If you're after a point and shoot snapshot lens then this would be OK .... for serious shooters it will not deliver IMO.

For Canon look at the 70-200mm L Glass f4 Lens - an absolute stonker at a bargain price considering the cracking IQ it delivers time and again.


(edited)

hb531

What's the differences between this one and Tamron 70-300mm f4/5.6 DI LD … What's the differences between this one and Tamron 70-300mm f4/5.6 DI LD Macro? The second one is only 89.99 at Jessops(http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/66320/Show.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=PLA&utm_term=70-300mm%20f4/5.6%20DI%20LD%20Macro%20(Canon%20AF)%20&gclid=CjwKEAiA-5-kBRDylPG5096R8mASJABqEdm4GFfzrpyy8lenOSHcPF8rJOB3gTh2PUHOqSPrBKLgrhoCrMPw_wcB)Read lessRead more

read here it is different

http://www.tamron.eu/uk/lenses/sp-af-70-300-f4-56-di-vc-usd/
tamron.eu/uk/…12/

Kfost

LOL, got to love these throwaway comments from someone who probably … LOL, got to love these throwaway comments from someone who probably hasn't owned or used the lens. The truth is that this is an outstanding lens especially for the price. I've owned one. You only have to look at real life examples on POTN to realise this.The 70-200 L is twice the price of this so you would expect better image quality. You would be surprised how close this Tamron gets though. It's like comparing apples and pears though. One is 70-200 without any image stabilisation, the other is 70-300 with VC and at half the price.Read lessRead more

Exactly, couldn't agree more. Totally different uses and not comparible in the slightest - One is point and shoot, one you need a tripod...how the hell can anyone compare such a thing. Some of the tosh coming out of people's mouths making such comparisons is beyond belief.

Just for clarity, it is not an essential requirement that you use a tripod when using this type of lens - regardless of whether it has image stabilisation or not... You just need to make sure that your shutter speed is good enough for the focal length. Generally speaking, the rule is 1/x, where x = focal length. So when shooting at 300mm, you need to make sure that your shutter speed is at least 1/300sec.... this is how you eliminate camera shake at long focal lengths without image stabilisation. Now if you've got really shaky hands, you might need an even faster shutter, say 1/500 maybe.

This does also change when you factor in crop sensor cameras, so for example 300mm on crop has the same field of view as a 450-480mm lens on full frame, so you should be thinking about a shutter speed of 1/500 at 300mm on a crop camera (So maybe 1/1000 for shaky handed people). This is easy outside... less so for indoor sports, but this lens isn't ideal for indoor sports. If you need to bump the ISO up - go for it. A sharp shot with a bit of noise is much better than a blurry shot with no noise.

Image stabilisation makes the composition of your shot and panning much nicer, and it is also really useful indoors for slower shutter speeds, but it is most definitely possible to shoot at 300mm without image stabilisation, and without a tripod...

Also available at Jessops and Wex for this price for those using quidco or TCB!

Superb price for a stunning range lens ;-)

Actual lens in this deal with official 5 year warranty:

http://www.tamron.eu/uk/lenses/sp-af-70-300-f4-56-di-vc-usd/

Review:

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/camera-lenses/tamron-sp-70-300mm-f-4-5-6-di-vc-usd-1042335/review

Demo of Auto focus & noise:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCYw5Acj1Ms

In depth testing: [very good!]

photozone.de/nik…6fx

My fav.. a Flickr group just for Tamron / camera lens!

flickr.com/gro…vc/

LifeOnSnickers

Also available at Jessops and Wex for this price for those using quidco … Also available at Jessops and Wex for this price for those using quidco or TCB!Read lessRead more

i know i added it already Description ,and wex 5 percent cash back on quidco,but i like amazon , it is so easy to send it back, :)))

MrRee

70-300 is always a temptation as the range is big .... but it compromises … 70-300 is always a temptation as the range is big .... but it compromises on image quality.Read lessRead more

Everything is a compromise mate. It is whether it is a hot deal.
(edited)

It's a good lens for the money. Not everybody can afford £600+ lenses. The reviews look good so you should get good results, especially if you can avoid maximum aperture. That's quite often the case with cheaper lenses.

Spod

It's a good lens for the money. Not everybody can afford £600+ lenses. … It's a good lens for the money. Not everybody can afford £600+ lenses. The reviews look good so you should get good results, especially if you can avoid maximum aperture. That's quite often the case with cheaper lenses.Read lessRead more

The maximum aperture is there to cater for unavoidable situations when you have to have something rather than nothing (if you avoid it absolutely).

I agree this lens is great for the price, I had a superb Sigma back in the day. I'm not a slave to the Camera makers offerings.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that a Canon 70-200 f4 L Glass Lens will produce better image quality than this lens, and as they can be had for just £100 more second hand, one should think long and hard about what to do.

The added benefit, of course, is that you get all your money back when you have finished with the L Glass Canon - maybe even more! This Tamron will not hold anything like its purchase price.

It's a good deal site after all ..... I'm just throwing out what I think is a better buy all things considered - you will notice the difference with every photo!





(edited)

It's a great lens, enjoy.

Also £239 for the Sony version.... I guess we Sony shooters don't need the VC as have stabilisation built into body. I'm considering this as an upgrade to the superb legendary Minolta Beer can 70-210mm f4 lens (less that £100 on ebay) for faster focusing. Unsure if sharpness and colour will be as good though....

What's the differences between this one and Tamron 70-300mm f4/5.6 DI LD Macro? The second one is only 89.99 at Jessops
(jessops.com/onl…tml?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=PLA&utm_term=70-300mm%20f4/5.6%20DI%20LD%20Macro%20(Canon%20AF)%20&gclid=CjwKEAiA-5-kBRDylPG5096R8mASJABqEdm4GFfzrpyy8lenOSHcPF8rJOB3gTh2PUHOqSPrBKLgrhoCrMPw_wcB)

bought this one Year ago for £285. great lens for this money

I haven't seen or used the lens, but this looks like a stonking bargain to me. Image stabilisation is what makes it a winner. I wouldn't recommend a telephoto lens without stabilisation. Heat deserved.

I purchased this from Jessops yesterday. Excellent lense and stonking value!

But, for £100 more you could have got into L Glass ..... which would blow your mind with the image quality

How good is this lens with Nilon D3200 for shooting a full hd video and photo pleaae

Generally speaking (but not always), people who buy L glass do so for the increase in image quality and constant aperture. The equivalent L lens to this isn't the 70-200 f4 L, but the 70-200 f4 L IS instead, which comes in at about £900. This is quite possibly the best non-L equivalent in the 70-200/70-300 range.
(edited)

Not used the lens but for Nikon snappers, would be better with a second-hand Nikon 70-300 VR which could probably be found at a similar price. Not new but optically an excellent lens and well built.

heat added

deleted57959

You need to realise that Tamron & Sigma make some lenses ow on par or … You need to realise that Tamron & Sigma make some lenses ow on par or better than the Nikon or Canon equivalents, i have a Tamron 90 1:1 macro lens, which gives the nikon 105 a run for its money.Read lessRead more

I would agree I have Sigma's 50mm 1.4 prime and its a beautiful lens, razor sharp wide open and focus very fast, only problem was it took me 2 attempts to get it, the first copy was no where near sharp enough wide open. If Tamron and Sigma both have quality control issues.

Donkii

I would agree I have Sigma's 50mm 1.4 prime and its a beautiful lens, … I would agree I have Sigma's 50mm 1.4 prime and its a beautiful lens, razor sharp wide open and focus very fast, only problem was it took me 2 attempts to get it, the first copy was no where near sharp enough wide open. If Tamron and Sigma both have quality control issues.Read lessRead more

I can't comment as much for Tamron, but Sigma have certainly upped their game recently... the new Art, Contemporary, and Sport lenses are top notch... especially considering the dock can fine tune any issues.

I'm guessing you're talking about the old 50mm 1.4 as opposed to the new 50mm 1.4 Art?

chrismarriott66

I can't comment as much for Tamron, but Sigma have certainly upped their … I can't comment as much for Tamron, but Sigma have certainly upped their game recently... the new Art, Contemporary, and Sport lenses are top notch... especially considering the dock can fine tune any issues. I'm guessing you're talking about the old 50mm 1.4 as opposed to the new 50mm 1.4 Art?Read lessRead more

Non ART, DX HSM, its a beautiful lens. I also owned the 10-20mm for years and loved it. I haven't owned an ART one or to be honest looked into them as I haven't been n the market for sometime. Thanks for the heads up though, I'm guessing with the improvments the price is increasinG?

Donkii

Non ART, DX HSM, its a beautiful lens. I also owned the 10-20mm for … Non ART, DX HSM, its a beautiful lens. I also owned the 10-20mm for years and loved it. I haven't owned an ART one or to be honest looked into them as I haven't been n the market for sometime. Thanks for the heads up though, I'm guessing with the improvments the price is increasinG?Read lessRead more

Yeah, that's the downside... The new 50mm 1.4 Art is about £650.

chrismarriott66

Yeah, that's the downside... The new 50mm 1.4 Art is about £650.

Certianly a big price tag, for that sort of money for a 3rd party prime it would indeed need to be damn near perfect.

I was looking at the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM as it seems to be better reviewed than this, but its at the £300 mark.

What are peoples thoughts on this?

£300 is just £61 more .... ie. nothing!

But, as I have said above, £350 will get you into L Glass .... which is a factor of 10 better than any other lens.

Buy the very best you can afford, and if you cannot afford the best simply don't buy.

The same with shoes and beds .... never, ever, buy cheap and skimp on them.

MrRee

£300 is just £61 more .... ie. nothing!But, as I have said above, £350 wi … £300 is just £61 more .... ie. nothing!But, as I have said above, £350 will get you into L Glass .... which is a factor of 10 better than any other lens.Buy the very best you can afford, and if you cannot afford the best simply don't buy.The same with shoes and beds .... never, ever, buy cheap and skimp on them.Read lessRead more

If the price difference was £300 vs £350, I would 100% go for the L lens, but the L lens is a 70-200 rather than a 70-300 and I could really do with that extra 100mm. Also, I understand that you probably don't need IS as much at 200-300mm as you'll be using a tripod, but I would like to be able to take shots handheld if absolutely required so the IS does help in that respect.

Would love the L due to the excellent sharpness but cannot justify the difference between 300 vs 900ish for similar spec (quality aside).

(edited)

Each to their own, I understand what you're saying.

Just I have owned big zooms, even super zooms, and I have L Glass now ..... the stunning, reliable, delivery of impeccable images is staggering - really it is.

When you have seen, as I have, the difference - then I feel compelled to comment and to guide.

Money to borrow is extremely cheap - and the L Glass will be worth what you pay for it. It's a leap of faith which you will never regret. I feel like a salesman, sorry about that, but I'm passionate that everyone should have the very best if at all possible.

thanks

This seems like a great deal for the quality of lens. I have the 55-300mm Nikon VR lens but the reviews for this lens are making me consider testing it out, to compare it against the Nikon.