52°
EXPIRED
Tamron 70-300mm F/4-5.6 LD Macro (Canon AF) £57.97 @ Jessops
Tamron 70-300mm F/4-5.6 LD Macro (Canon AF) £57.97 @ Jessops

Tamron 70-300mm F/4-5.6 LD Macro (Canon AF) £57.97 @ Jessops

Buy forBuy forBuy for£57.97
GETGet dealVisit site and get deal
Tamron 70-300mm F/4-5.6 LD Macro (Canon AF)

Seems like a decent price to me, although it has had mixed reviews I don't think you can go wrong at this price. Also features 1:2 macro capability.

FREE standard delivery or reserve and collect in store.

18 Comments

Hard to fault at under 60 quid!

Banned

Urgh cheap and cheerful I suppose.. shouldn't be expecting too much in the way of IQ though..

not bad, i opted for the sigma 70-300 usm paid £99 for it.

Original Poster

wazza1234;5209186

Urgh cheap and cheerful I suppose.. shouldn't be expecting too much in … Urgh cheap and cheerful I suppose.. shouldn't be expecting too much in the way of IQ though..



Absolutely - mixed reviews I looked at suggested it was way too soft when wide open at the 300mm end. But, for sub £60, it must be of use to a beginner maybe.

they've pulled it... darn !

Price coming up as £258
]http//ww…tml

Original Poster

bigflump;5209349

Price coming up as … Price coming up as £258]http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/products/Tamron/70-300mm%20f45.6%20DI%20LD%20Macro%20(Canon%20AF)-66320/Show.html



Bah, looks like it's gone. The £258 one is the Di version, which is supposedly much better. Perhaps there were only a few in stock, though it definately said collection from store available too. :-(

mallen;5209379

Bah, looks like it's gone. The £258 one is the Di version, which is … Bah, looks like it's gone. The £258 one is the Di version, which is supposedly much better. Perhaps there were only a few in stock, though it definately said collection from store available too. :-(


Shame it didnt last, I was tempted to get one :thumbsup:
And I dont even have an SLR yet :w00t:

Banned

flyingteddy;5209235

not bad, i opted for the sigma 70-300 usm paid £99 for it.



I used to own one of those sigma 70-300 lenses, they were pretty decent for the money. There was nothing "Ultra Sonic" about the motors though..they were loooooud.

Canon 70-200 these days, never looked back

wazza1234;5209577

Canon 70-200 these days, never looked back



Yes, but that's a "no contest" The 70-200f4 IS is probably the best zoom lens money can buy, period.

Original Poster

LotusJas;5209660

Yes, but that's a "no contest" The 70-200f4 IS is probably the best … Yes, but that's a "no contest" The 70-200f4 IS is probably the best zoom lens money can buy, period.



Agreed! I picked up the 70-200 F4 L two weeks ago and it's absolutely outstanding. The L series lenses are a dream to use, no rotating ends, no physical extension on the 70-200, and it's light enough to carry around all day. Then again they are over 10 times the price of this one.

Would you choose that over a 70-200 L 2.8 is ?

Banned

Legacy;5209830

Would you choose that over a 70-200 L 2.8 is ?



I did because, I travel with my gear alot & have weight restrictions. I also got it before the f4IS was out, I'd love to have the 2.8IS but couldn't justify the big increase in weight. I think the F4 is an amazing lens, but the 2.8IS gets rave reviews as well, if you don't mind the cost & the weight I can't see why you would pick the F4 over the 2.8..

I understand

******. I would have had one at that price. :-(

Should bag yourself a 100-400 IS L series, awesome.

Original Poster

Legacy;5209830

Would you choose that over a 70-200 L 2.8 is ?



I also went for the F4 L over the F2.8. The 2.8 weighs almost twice as much and also costs a hell of a lot more. If you really need to shoot in low light then get the 2.8, but the 4 is great for travel. Mine is the non-IS version, I think the IS F4 is quite new. If you can afford it get the IS. Saying that, the non-IS is fine if you can keep your shutter speed under 1/250. I had some excellent results in Greece last week as the weather was lovely and I really didn't miss the IS which I have on the 17-85 lens. The only time it might have helped was photographing inside some caves, but I had to use a tripod anyway.

If I had the cash spare I'd probably upgrade to the F4 IS but the 2.8 is just too much to lug around for me.

Legacy;5209830

Would you choose that over a 70-200 L 2.8 is ?



Yes :thumbsup:

The f4 IS one is sharper, and has a much better (newer) IS system. On something like a 5Dii you can ramp up ISO easily enough to make up for the 1 stop slower speed :thumbsup:

I'd rather add a 135 f2 if you really need speed, and you can use a TC on it for more reach :thumbsup:
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text