Third Party Lens

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Cassandra on October 31, 2009 at 12:49pm

What kind of shooting do you do and how much do you want to spend? I've been pretty happy with the Tamron 18-270mm. There are a couple of small issues with it but for me, just a hobbyist with limited funds, it works well enough. : )

Happy Halloween!

Permalink Reply by Ken Lloyd on October 31, 2009 at 2:16pm

Generally shoot events involving family members like my daughter in the band at HS football games, nature when I go camping which is often and historical architecture. Would not want to go over $500. I am a hobbyist too, nothing real serious even though I am tending to get more involved since friends are asking for prints and enlargements.

How much is Tamron 18-270mm and what are the minor issues?

Permalink Reply by Cassandra on November 2, 2009 at 1:15pm

At the widest angle, you'll definitely start to see a little barrel distortion, especially if you have horizontal/vertical lines toward the extremes of your image (they'll bend). In most cases, you can correct this in a program like Photoshop (if that sort of post-processing doesn't bother you). Personally, that's the only problem I've come across, but in doing research before buying it I heard some folks complaining about the construction of it. Some folks said it was pretty solid, others didn't. I honestly don't have enough experience with different lenses of different manufacturers to say- I imagine that depends upon what you've been using or can afford as an alternative (dpreview is a good place to start if you're looking for more specifics- even Amazon and CNET, just balance what you read with what you think a reviewer's experience is). But, in my opinion, if you're not a professional (meaning, you shoot mostly for personal reasons), you have limited funds (meaning, you're not interested in spending thousands on the latest and greatest glass) and you have limited space and time to fiddle with your already heavy camera bag (there's a point where my quest for quality is eclipsed by my quest to be practical), then I think the Tamron is a good overall choice/compromise. If you travel a lot or don't want to miss a shot while you're swapping out a lens, it can be a real advantage. It was just over $500- there's also the 18-250mm, which is a little cheaper.

But, there are others to consider, as well, that I haven't used. Hopefully someone else chimes in with another opinion for you!

Permalink Reply by Ken Lloyd on November 2, 2009 at 3:49pm

Thanks Cassandra. I have been doing online research at the sites you mentioned. I'm planning to visit some camera stores to see if I can get my hands on one and attached to my camera and take a few shots as my final research step. So far I think this the lens for me. Your criteria for this lens is right on the mark for me. I couldn't have stated it better, in fact it help me clarify my reasoning for seriously considering this lens, Thanks. It is as of you ventured into my mind and unscrambled all of my thoughts into a coherent, logical perspective. I will also look at the 18-250mm just for the cost consideration. Once again thanks you'll never know how much you've help my befuddled thought process.

Permalink Reply by Cassandra on November 9, 2009 at 10:24am

Ken, great! I'm glad it helped. Best of luck- and definitely try it out in case I wasn't really in your mind. : ) I know there are others that would likely fit what you want as well; I just haven't used them.

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hatcher on December 11, 2009 at 10:11am

If you want a general-purpose "walking around" lens, I'd gravitate toward one with vibration compensation. This makes a HUGE difference in your handheld shots, and is probably worth the extra money. Nikon's 55mm - 200mm f/4-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR doesn't give you the "wide-end", but for $220 makes a pretty nice GP lens. I took that lens with me to Sea World a while back, and was able to use it for most of my shots. (I have uploaded a few for your perusal). I'm mostly using the Tamron 18-270 now, which can be had after rebate for about $530. I think you get better image quality from the Nikon, but I can't really call that one yet. The Tamron definately takes the award for versatility. The dandelion shot was taken with the Tamron, which has an excellent close-focus capability

Attachments:

• DSC_0770.JPG, 3.8 MB
• _DSC0998.jpg, 3.7 MB
• _DSC0459.JPG, 4 MB

Permalink Reply by Jeff Hatcher on November 28, 2009 at 5:59pm

The Vibration compensation (VC) function on the 18-270 is fantastic. For a general purpose walking around lens, I have no complaints the 180-270 VC, and would recommend it for being one of the most balanced super-zooms with a highly effective vibration compensation mechanism. When I just want to go to the park, travel light, and take nice photos, this is what I take. For fun, check out some of the old Nikon prime lenses on Ebay. I've got some nice glass (f/1.8 85mm, f/2.5 105mm, f/1.8 50mm, f/2/8 35mm, f/2.8 180mm, f/2.8 28mm) for a song, and get some really nice results with them.

Permalink Reply by Ken Lloyd on December 12, 2009 at 11:28pm

I have the Nikon 55-200mm and just love to shoot with it. It's not all that fast in low light but has produce some great shots. I used it at my daughter's dance competition from the seats in the auditorium and was really surprised at great the shots I got without a flash. Recently add the 16-85mm Nikon leans,,,wow!! Took it to an NFL pregame activities outside the stadium and was blown away at the speed and sharpness of the pics I got. Think this lens will be on my D5K body most of the time. Oh yeah got some great shot indoors during thanksgiving of the family with this glass also, without a flash.