And I am sorry I am behind, as soon as Sony stops introducing new camera bodies, the backlog will be reviewed, I promise :)!

I am glad I helped you with the A200 review. I am smitten with the A200, for what it is in the price range, I don't see anything on the market that can beat it, and I think it even beats cameras much pricer than itself too.

That said, I am just about as smitten with the 70-300 Tamron. For the price, probably in the top 3 overall best values of lenses out there today.

Watch out for CA's wide open, and for soft images. Easily remedied with stopping the lens down to about F8.

Barrel and pincushion distortions aren't ever a worry.

It's not a smoking fast focusing lens, but it isn't slow either. I found it keeps up well with the birds and moving things as long as you are locked on and not in "macro" mode.

I like using this lens from f7.1 to f11, and will still use it at f5.6 too.

Build is better than its price. Made in China, but good quality control.

Front element rotates, but I won't use a polarizer on it anyhow.

Anything you want to know, just ask and Ill be glad to help you.

Cheers,

Carl

hey we own a Tamron 70-300 and like it alot. We actually went to buy a manfrotto tripod and saw that we could get the 70-300 and a Giotto tripod for the same price. I wish we had just bought the lens and left the giotto. But the lens is really useful. As Carl said it isn't fast but for 200 bucks its fast enough. My wife catches birds in flight with it, and they are really crisp. Definately worth the money. If you are having bad luck on ebay. Don't count out your local camera shops on old minolta stuff. I got a beercan for like 25 bucks and my 50mm for 40 or 50.

CA can be a problem with high contrast shots, and agreed it's a little slow. However....

For macro shots of larger subjects, it's a beaut! My summer output is dragonfly/butterfly dominated, and despite owning a dedicated macro lens, get some stunning results from the Tamron.

Alt+Carl

One huge added bonus of having gone with Sony is being part of this community. I've recently joined Dyxum, and now here, and I've become slightly more active in the Sony and K-M forums on dpreview. My experience has been quite positive all-around. I couldn't be happier with my decision to buy into the Alpha Mount world.

believe in the underdog. KM was genious in design, and a white knight showed up to help them on thier way.

I repeatedly look at the competition to see what they offer, and I still believe Sony offers overall the best value for the Dollar. The handbuilt lenses are still pricey (G series) but they are working on that.

Good to see you so excited, and a part of our community. We are just as excited to have you here.

Carl

Hi

I've been following this thread about the tamron and just wondered if anybody has the Sony 75-300, which is about the same price. If so what do they think?

I will shortly be buying a new lens and can't make my mind up between the Tamron, the sony or the sigma 35-300 macro, which is about £100 more but has good reviews.

Decisions Decisions

Ed ( Dave )

I had the Sony 70-300.

In comparison to the Sigma 70-300 and the Tamron 70-300, I would take either before the Sony.

Both are sharper and have better color and less CA although they are all 3 prone to it.

Build quality is good on the Sony, and in comparison to the other two that is really the only advantage.

I really hated the color on the sony, and hate is a strong word. But that is subjective.

C

I have the KM equivalent of the Sony 75-300mm. I've found that it's okay for my modest needs; but being a budget lens, it doesn't enjoy a particularly good reputation. I'm sure the Tamron can outperform it. However, one small advantage of the KM/Sony, at least for me, is that it has 55mm filter threads like many of my other lenses.

You might also note that Sony has just introduced a big, chunky 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G series lens priced at about $800, if that's within your budget. ;)

"I had the Sony 70-300."

Carl, do you mean the 75-300mm?

Yes, and thank you for pointing that out!

Carl

As promised, a couple of Tamron shots from last year's dragonfly season...

Alt+Carl

I also have both the Minolta 75-300 and the Tamron 70-300 DI.

I would not waste money on the Sony version. The Tamron outperforms the Min/Sony and also has the added 1:2 macro feature which I find quite useful. With the Min/Sony you can't focus on anything closer than about 6 feet.

I would agree the tamron is a smarter buy (unless you get a very good kit lens deal with a body)
On the other hand, I have seen some decent 75-300mm's, and evidently I hear it really is 300mm, and the tamron and sigmas are not exactly there. I dont have side by side to compare, maybe someone could.

In closing, new buy..just get the tamron, its cheaper than the sony (price is not good on its own), and overall better, s/h ebay deal..its well worth looking at, not as bad as many make out. It's a better film lens than digital IMHO..

Excuse the film grain!

Certainly able to capture reasonable levels of details, a lower ISO film whould show this better.

They make for a very convincing argument. What I'm wondering, really, is how this lens would fit into my budding kit. Right now, I'm trying to buy a beercan. As stated though, I apparently fail at ebay. Should I get this lens instead? Can both 'fit' into the same kit? How would I justify owning both (to myself and my fiancee)?

I'm just starting off my kit, so I'm very flexible; but that's, perhaps, a topic best left for a separate thread (if we're trying to keep this thread focused on the tammy).

If you are trying to decide between a beercan and the Tamron. I own both, and the beercan is neat for a while, and I am sure some people love using it. BUT once the novelty of it wears off its more like a "Oh yeah, we have this old thing, lets make sure it still works." type of thing. We use the Tamron alot, and i'm not sure where our beercan is right now.

I WOULD DEFINATELY GET THE TAMRON.

BUT once the novelty of it wears off its more like a "Oh yeah, we have this old thing, lets make sure it still works." type of thing. We use the Tamron alot, and i'm not sure where our beercan is right now.

Really? Would you mind expanding on that? I've read plenty of good arguments in favour of the beercan: it's constant f/4, the fact that it is very sharp even wide open, and that it has excellent bokeh. What are your gripes about it? Just too heavy to lug around?

Nothing wrong with the 70-210mm f4 (the word beercan is an unfortunate name to a well known adult movie star!!!)

Solid build, optics are good, and speed for the range too. Nice lens. What dampens the impact a tad is its no longer the once cracking ebay steal it once was, prices have gone up a lot on that lens over the years. Its still very affordable in comparison to a new lens though, just not an uber bargain anymore..

No, I see exactly what you mean.

/me shakes fits angrily at ebay

And to think when KM pulled out, people were suggesting ebay would be swamped with most minolta users wholescale dumping all their gear..and low prices off the back of it! Hmmmmmm...

Partly down to more users being around now with new cameras, going bargain hunting..more demand, higher prices

maybe i got a dud, but on top of the weight I had issues with it focusing. perhaps i haven't given it a fair chance. also if i am remembering correctly the auto focus was on again off again. but on a budget, if i had to choose between the used 20 some year old glass, and a new lens with a 6 year warranty...

They are 20 year old lenses. Some have probably been used for hard for all 20 years. Based on posts I have read on KM/Sony forums, I get the impression that the beercan probably isn't as good as many more modern lenses that cover the same range. Depending on who is bidding, it may also not be much cheaper than those newer lenses. Yours is not the first post I have read about someone been disappointed by the beercan. Given that I have never tried the beercan, it's hard for me to know how much of the fervor around it is just hype.

I think Minolta lens prices on ebay have almost doubled since the time the A100 was first released. I lost quite a few auctions on 400mm lenses, but I noticed every newly listed 400mm lens sold for a little bit more $$ than the last. I wished I had bid more aggressively from the start. The only exception was a Quantaray branded version of the 135-400 that went for $266. It was poorly listed and included nothing about really being a Sigma or compatibility with the Sony/KM DSLR IIRC.

the Tamron.

it also looks like the Sony will not find a place in my kit bag.

Ed (Dave)

I have had the Tamron 70-300mm DI and loved it, and yes you do have to watch out for CA wide open. I sold mine as it wouldnt fit the A200 and opted this time for the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG, I have to say they are both very good lenses, and very reasonable in price. I have yet to see any CA with the Sigma but I am sure given the right conditions it will rear its nasty head.

Terry.

Carl,
I have the A200 and just purchased the Promaster version of the Tammy (Same A17 lens model) and I am curious as to why you would not use a polarizer on this lens, besides the turning front element.

Thanks,

Keith