Jump to content

nikon 70-300 VR vs. Tamron 18-250, help!


mollie_clark

Recommended Posts

Ok I am trying to decide which of these lenses to buy. Price is not an issue

because I am getting it through my work so they are both the same price for me.

 

The Nikon is the 70-300 f4-6.3 VR lens.

pros: ED glass, VR, quiet focusing

cons: big and bulky, f stop only goes down to 4...

 

The Tamron is the 18-250 f3.5-6.3 lens.

pros: very small and compact, all around good coverage from wide angle to zoom,

f stop 3.5

cons: I don't know very much about the tamron glass but I'm pretty sure its not

as good as the nikon ED glass...

 

anyone who knows about these lenses I would really appreciate any advice or help

deciding! Thanks!

 

 

--Mollie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How will you be using it? What sort of subjects, settings, light, etc? Will the work budget cover the wildly superior 70-200 f2.8 VR? Or, is 200mm not quite long enough? And, if big and bulky is a concern, the 18-200VR is also a very versatile lens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Nikon is actually a 70-300mm, f4.5-5.6 AF-S VR.

 

Unless you need one lens that goes from wide to long tele, I would stick with the Nikon. It is an AF-S lens so that it will AF with any Nikon DSLR, including the D40 family and anything in the future that does not have an in-body AF motor. f5.6 at 300mm means you'll still have reasonable AF on its long end. When the maximum aperture dips below f5.6, such as the Tamron's 6.3, AF becomes very iffy. And of course VR can be useful for a long and somewhat slow lens.

 

If you need a wide to long tele such as 18-200mm, I would try to get the Nikon version, which is hard to find and somewhat overpriced at the moment. However, any such 11x zoom will involve a lot of optical compromises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to be using it for various different situations so I need something pretty versatile. I'm not looking to go for the 2.8 version because it is way over my budget right now.

 

I'm just mainly concerned about the glass quality and also the VR is really making me lean towards the nikon so I wont need to be so dependant on the tripod :)

 

I've considered the 18-200 also, but I already have an 18-55 kit lens that I believe would get the job done for any wide angle shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<< ... I already have an 18-55 kit lens ... >>

 

Then, if it were me, the Nikkor zoom with VR would be awfully tempting.

 

Big advantage to an "18 - world" zoom is the idea that you don't need any other lenses. But there are compromises involved in designing such a lens -- some of them not trivial -- and on the longer side, I think the VR would be very useful.

 

And if you're in an available light situation where you can't use flash, you'll still want a fast lens. The one I'd recommend there, if an effective 75mm length is wide enough for you, would be the 50mm F/1.8 AF-D Nikkor -- very sharp and tough to beat at around $100 brand new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mollie! I shoot with a D70. I use the 18-55 for wide angle stuff and recently picked up the 70-300 VR. ABSOLUTELY LOVE the lens. It seems I am always taking shots in questionable light and hand hold lotsa' stuff. Very much worth the $$$. I would not like the one size fits all due to limitations of speed etc.

Just my two cents.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mollie, it sounds to me like the 300m range is something you really want. In a choice between the two, I would lean toward the Nikon 70-300VR for the following reasons:

 

[1] You already have the short end covered with another lens.

 

[2] VR is a huge advantage when holding a chunky lens like this, even more so because you apparently don't want to use a tripod.

 

[3] The Tamron 'macro' magnification is really only 1:3.5, not 1:1 like a 'real' macro. The 70-300 VR is a 1:4 lens.

 

[4] IMO, the Nikon offers better optics.

 

The only downsides to Nikon, bulkier and slower (but VR can make up for some of the slower). If you can handle swinging around a lens like this, I think Nikon is the way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no doubt that a sharp lens with a range from 18 to 250mm can be built, but it won't be without compromises in other areas. Especially at the wide end you'll see considerable barrel distortion. But there are other factors besides sheer image quality that may steer your choice. Most important is how the lens handles, even a so-so lens that you feel comfortable with will give better pictures than a super lens that doesn't. If there's any chance to try them side by side, then that would be ideal.

 

For what it's worth, I really like the 70-300VR. Image quality is fine, and handling superb.<div>00Kujw-36218784.jpg.540c84506bc9645aa896a602791dfc84.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mollie, I have had my 70-300VR for one week and love it. I suggest going to a camera shop and trying out the lens on your camera to see if you find it too large. It is a little heaveir than I thought it would be but had it around my neck for 3hrs last weekend at a track meet and had no problems. One test you need to do when you test the lens is make sure the VR is on, zoom out to 300mm, find someone or thing across the room or outdoors (100 yds is ideal), put your focus square on the subject and notice the movement, now push the button down halfway to focus and turn on the VR and watch the movement go away. When you see this it will sell the lens. Salesmen are you reading this. The only weakness I have to comeplain about is skin tone, all other colors are great, maybe I am just spoiled by my Nikon 50mm/1.8 for portraits.

 

JMO,

 

Tim Knight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If money is not an issue I would get the Nikkor 18-200 VR. It really depends on what you need if you can get away with the 70-300 range then optically it's going to be better. If you need something that can go from wide to tele then there is only one choice. If you have a wide lens then I would definitely get the Nikon 70-300 it is a better lens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

I have the tamron 18-250, unfortunately. if someone out there thinks that they are making

sharp images with one of these, I would love for them to post one or two here, or email me

them! Please. today I tested all my lenses on my d200. tamron, tokina 12-24, nikon 50 1.8

and an old nikon as 55 2.8 macro manual focus from my f3. The only lens that I saw anything

close to real sharpness with was the 55 macro. I am afraid to ever shoot anything again with

all the other lenses! my just bought canon G9 is MUCH sharper than any of these also.

I would love someone to tell me what the heck is going on! I've been shooting for 35 years

and this is making me nuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...