Tamron 18-270 VR

[bill_morrow1]

Anybody got one yet, and what do you think of it. I have an 18-250 without VR (their version of IS). A little more

buffer at the high end would be nice, but probably not worth the upgrade. And then finding somebody dumb enough

to buy the 250, when "they could have had a V8". Seriously, the IS is so helpful at the high end. In a hurried

moment, I've missed some shots I probably would have gotten with an IS. Thanks in advance...

[jeff_delisio]

A review of several superzooms here including the Tamron

 

 

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/superzoomtest

[bill_morrow1]

Thanks Jeff. It certainly reads well. Fellow at the local camera store, who plays with everything that

comes in the door I think--said he was not that impressed with the Canon 18-200. The 55-250

on the other hand he felt,--and I agree--has superior sharpness. For important things I'll

use an L, and it rarely fails to get the shot. His review noted the same thing that confronts everyone

on vacation, and that is I don't want to be changing lenses in the field.

Thanks again

[jimstrutz]

Just bought one. I did a quick test to see how un-sharp, dull, lifeless, and distorted, it would be. :)

 

I was pleasantly surprised. The bad barrel distortion at 18mm was gone at 24mm, it has as much contrast as my Canon 70-300 IS, and seems to be as sharp in the center. I didn't get to test the edges well enough to say for sure, but they didn't look bad for what I was shooting. There is some moderate CA at the edges, but I didn't have opportunity to test that very well. The VR system works very well. Seems to be every bit as good, or better, than the IS on Canon's 70-300.

 

It's a superzoom, and as such, it isn't supposed to be a great lens. But it's quite a bit better than I thought it would be. I'll know more after I use it for a while.

[bill_morrow1]

Jim: I had the same thoughts when I bought my 18-250. I too was pleasantly surprised.

[james_glucksman1]

I bought one just a few weeks ago (was apparently the first person to buy one from the shop, they made a big thing of it) and have tried it

out a few times already and am quite pleased with it. I bought it so that my partner will have an easy lens to use to go from wide to tele on

his 50D, and I think it will serve that purpose very well.

[kos_piters]

Hi! I got my Tamron 18-270 a few days ago and am a bit bothered about the clacking noise the lens does a few seconds after a shot. Seams like the noise comes from the VR as it turns off. Does anyone have the same? I use it with 50D.

[jimstrutz]

Kos, on mine (on a 40D) I get a light "click-whirrr" when the VC (IS) comes on, and a "whirrr-click when it turns off a few seconds after the shot. In between I can faintly hear the gyros turning. I know that some of Canon's early IS lenses made different noises than the new ones do, and the noise was different on different bodies. On old film bodies (as opposed to the later film bodies) the 75-300 would make a big jerk in the viewfinder as it came on & off. It's all strange to have you lenses make noises, but I suspect most of them are normal for the age in which we now live.

[kos_piters]

Thanks, Jim! It's comforting to know there is nothing bad about the noise. Generally, I am quite happy with this lens. One thing Tamron should try to improve is the focusing speed. It is very slow, especially in low light conditions.

[kos_piters]

Thanks, Jim! It's comforting to know there is nothing bad about the noise. Generally, I am quite happy with this lens.

One thing Tamron should try to improve is the focusing speed. It is very slow, especially in low light conditions.