Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2 Review
Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2 Summary Review
June 2009, Carl Garrard
 |
Our review reveals that Tamron's 70-300mm f/4-f/5.6 LD Macro 1:2 Lens is currently one of the most affordable and versatile lenses in its range. It is a highly popular lens and is available in just about every DSLR mount because its features and performance for the price creates a high demand from photographers of many levels of experience. For the Alpha Mount it offers full frame coverage, a 1:2 macro feature, 9 aperture blades, Limited Dispersion Elements (LD) to control aberrations, elements coated for digital optics, and a full 6 year warranty. It has been widely available since spring of 2006. |
Introduction
The Tamron 70-300mm (shortened for ease of reading) has gone through 3 different design versions dating way back to 2001. The latest version is arguably the best optically and has added the macro feature allowing close focusing with a 1:2 magnification ratio, and with the addition of digital coatings and low dispersion elements, the Tamron does a very good job at controlling ghosting, flare, and chromatic abberations (for its price).
This is a lens that offers incredible value. Easily the Tamron 70-300mm would be in my top 5 choices when recommending a new lens to a beginner on a budget. Price on the Tamron ranges from as low as near $100.00 US to about $220.00 US depending on the retailer. Used copies can be had for even less.
Characteristics and General Performance
The build of the Tamron is actually very decent considering its budget pricing. Assembled in China, the Tamron 70-300mm Lens has an all high density plastic exterior and interior, with a surprising aluminum alloy lens mount. The adequate lens hood is also made of plastic and is included in the purchase.
Other versions of this lens include a small autofocus motor and a af/mf switch built in, but that would be redundant since all of the current Alpha DSLRS have a built in auto focus motor in the body. Hence the lens is screw driven, and is inherently a bit noisier autofocusing than its counterparts. However, I don't find the Tamron to be all that noisy when the cards are on the table. Know that the Tamron is not an internal focusing lens, so the front element does rotate when focusing.
Overall the fit and finish feels a bit better than expected for such an affordable lens. The zoom ring is a bit stiff but this isn't an issue. It helps to tame 'lens creep' when it hangs from your neck, and has a decent feeling action. The manual focus ring exhibits very little lateral play at all, and is surprisingly smooth and precise in action. I really like manual focusing this lens.
For macro photography, the Tamron 70-300mm lens has a dedicated switch on top of the lens, which can only be activated between 180-300mm throughout its focal length. It appears to allow the lens to continue on a focus path that allows for closer focusing, and at 300mm brings the minimum subject size to about 2x the size of the sensor. That is a pretty small area and really comes in handy when making photographs of insects, flowers, and other small objects that need greater magnification.
The macro feature adds in my opinion one of the most practical and versatile aspects to this lens. I literally leave my macro lens at home when choosing this lens for work in the field. Does this mean it can replace a high end macro lens? Well, that all depends on your requirements or how seriously you take your macro work. As a one lens solution, the Tamron can cover what 2 lenses normally will, and do it better than most lenses that come even close to this focal length (less the Sigma 70-300mm model). Minimum focus distance is about 35" in macro mode, and 60 inches when not. This gives you plenty of distance from jittery subjects that might be intimidated by a giant cyclops coming toward them.
Generally speaking the Tamron focuses pretty quickly, but is by no means a speed racer. The Tamron takes 14.5 screw turns from the beginning to the end of the focus plane, which is above average. When using an Alpha body with the newer focus motor (A200-900), auto-focusing speed becomes respectable and will get the job done for most subjects.
Shooting birds in flight, or airplanes at an air show will require some anticipation and adjustments, but with practice good to very good results are quite possible. The lack of a focus limiter means that if the camera body doesn't lock on the first try, it will hunt focus through the full AF range, which can take quite some time. This is probably the biggest obstacle to overcome when shooting any moving objects, know this will take some getting used too.
Silly me
left the comments in the off mode heh. :(
Ah, a deliberate ploy, young Carl...
To confuse us!
Must admit Carl, I've used the Tamron since my KM5d days, and apart from working around the CA in high contrast, have found it to be a stunning lil bargain. Still miss it, when it's on Amber's A200!
Carl
this lens was my first big dSLR mistake!
I was ready to buy it a year ago, but fell instead to the lure of an adjacent Tamron 28-200 - a decidedly inferior telephoto lens (though it was fine below 100mm) that cost me $100 more.. or was that $150?. Had I picked up this lens instead, my lens mix would be decidedly different today (and with fewer $$ lost through reselling.. sigh). So, who wants my 18-250?-)
Thanks for rubbing it in - - er, for the fine review :^)
carl you are on to me
deliberate... I apologize ;).
guess I was just checking to see if you were still on your toes.. how silly of me to doubt you.
C
Sheesh Carl, it's about
Sheesh Carl, it's about time:). I am glad I did not wait for your review to buy mine!! But wait, you did give me some advice and pictures on this lens when I got it.
Just kidd'n. Nice review!! The only thing I still wonder about is that my lens has the plastic mount instead of a metal mount. I never could figure that one out.
Ron
About the mount
it should have a hybrid mount Ron, where a portion of the mount is metal, covered in plastic. I've seen pictures of that mount now finally, which is how Tamron has designed some of their other lenses in that fashion.
Thank you
For the information, in particular the "Sweet Spot". Thanks to you I have taken my best pics ever with this lens. Your advice really helped someone new to photography as myself.
Thanks for the review!
I ordered this lens shortly after reading this review. I just wanted to say thanks because it is truly a joy to use! (And CHEAP!) Learning when I was allowed to switch the macro feature on and off was a little tricky, but once I got the hang of it, I spent the whole day taking pictures of small stuff around the house. (Flowers... dust... grapes... my dog's nose... etc.) Great fun!
Then I pointed my camera towards the sky to test how far I can go --- and I can honestly say I've never been this close to the moon before! (Cropped and cleaned up in Aperture 2.0)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jurado/3686262863/
At any rate - great site! Keep the reviews coming! Especially on the 3rd party stuff that perform as well as Sony's own! (Hobbyist on a budget... hah!)
Thank you very much Jurado
I am glad you like this lens, it is indeed a fun lens to use. I will keep trying to mix up the reviews as much as possible and as funds are available for purchase.
That reminds me, I need to contact Tamron!
Thanks,
Carl
mount
I've just got my new Tamronlens, version a17s. And it does not have an metal mount anymore. It's an cutting costs issue i think.
Look closely at the base of the mount
it should be part metal and plastic combined? I think they were/are produced two ways....
Carl
Tamron AF = 300
Carl
thank you for your review. Am in the market for a new lens as all I have is the standard 18-70 kit lens for my A350. How does the image quality compare with the Sony 18-250 which in the UK is more than twice as much to buy?
With thanks
Dominic
A simple question
Does this len got image stablisation function? What does the DI stand for?
Thanks
No need for image stabilization
For Minolta/Sony cameras as image stabilization is done at a sensor level.
Di- Stand for Digitally Integrated, which basically means the optics are optimized with coatings that are more compatible with digital sensors say, vs. film.
Carl
Thanks Carl. I ask this
Thanks Carl. I ask this question because i want to buy a Nikon... I am looking for a telephoto lens, preferrably upto 300mm, with a image stablizer for my Nikon d5000. Any suggestions?
Sure glad to help. Why not on the advice, see below:
55-200mm VR lens, about $200.00 from what I saw, your best price I'm afraid (that I am aware of).
70-300mm VR is about $530.00
70-200mm f/2.8G VR is about 1,900.00
80-400mm VR f/4-f/5.6 is about 1,600.00
Keep in mind that the D5000 does not autofocus for screw driven lenses as it doesn't have an in-body focus motor, at least if my memory serves correct. So you will need to make sure you get lenses with a motor included if you want auto focus.
Carl
Hi Carl, I am struggling to
Hi Carl,
I am struggling to buy a decent telephoto zoom lens but due to budget constraints I am unable to shortlist any. I see you are quite a guru in writing good reviews and helping people with their decisions.
As much as i would love to buy the Sony 70-300mm G lens, it's a bit over priced for me. I am looking at expanding my wide angle capability by investing in a good WA lens, and having a decent zoom (around 250-300mm) to give me the complete range.
After reading this review thrice and doing more reseach on the internet about this lens, i was pretty sure this is it --- until when I went out to buy it, the salesman convinced me out of it saying i should go for the sony 75-300 mm instead! I guess he was just not a Tamron fan or a third party lens user himself... strange for someone to refuse business, which was quite convincing for me!
Hence i resort to you....
So what would you recommend: Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 or the SAL 75-300mm 4.5-5.6?
Would really appreciate if you could help me out of my dilema!!!
Hi Adeel
Hi Adeel,
The Sony lens is not as good optically as the Tamron lens. You are right that's it's odd to refuse business... was the Sony lens more expensive?
Hopefully that helps.
I am buying it in Singapore,
I am buying it in Singapore, and the sony lens is costing me around Sing $399. The tamron one will cost me at least a 100 bucks lesser.
I can also ask a friend who is visiting form the US to get me the tamron from there as it would be cheaper... not sure if they have the sony mount here yet!
I have heard that with 3rd party lenses sometimes the lenses are not properly calibrated and they need to be sent to service centre. Not sure if its true and if it is i will have to check if tamron has a sevice centre here
The argument that the shopkeeper gave me was that he prefers users to buy lenses of the same manufacturer as the body.. they are unarguably better than the third parties.. I did not take that on face value, but then its not hard to get double minded!
So i take it that you would prefer the tamron over the Sony 75-300?
Thanks a lot for your reply....
I'd take the Tamron
over the sony in a heartbeat and 10 times on Wednesday.
Now, the Sony 70-300G- thats a whole different matter optically :)
Price wise the Tamron is your best bet.
Carl
Hi, do you know if there is
Hi, do you know if there is many differences with the old version (the no Di version)?
Thanks.
I believe the Di version has
I believe the Di version has updated coatings to combat sensor glare that can sometimes occur with digital capture. The coatings should also helps deal with some of the aberrations too. Unless there is a massive difference in price I would get the latest version of the 70-300.
option to change to Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD
Hi, I'm happy to finally see a detailed review regarding this lens, to keep this short I recently bought a Nikon D90 with the 18-105 kit lens and as a freebie also got a Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G then after going back to the store I found out that I can opt to have this Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD which puzzles me which of these two is the best one to keep.
I am leaning towards this Tamron because of its versatility having a Macro capability, but would not want to sacrifice image quality (I assume) that the Nikon lens provides.
I would appreciate the help. Thank you in advance.
Thanks Carl
I bought already this lens and im very satisfied with the results...
Heres an example photos taken with this lens...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3495/3831492016_535ace8827_b.jpg
Canon T1i
Hi there,
I am looking for a similar lens that you would recommend for a Canon -- however, with the Canon series the Image Stabilization is done through the lens.
Do you have any recommendations?
Thanks in advance![img][/img]
distance
Hi Carl,
which is the distance from you and the birds or rabbit ?
Thanks
Marco
Hi Marco
The distance varied. The rabbit shot I was about 12-15' away (rough estimate). I don't recall on the birds at this point but you can make an estimation based on the focal length shot at the time.
Carl
Tamron 70-300mm VR
[img][/img]I find the lens focuses sometimes and then does not allow the camera to snap.
I have to zoom i n and out to get it to finally snap
Any suggestions
sandy
Tamron really are good?
I'm new at this forum, but looking lenses wuth good quality, Tamron not disappoint me? I have a sony a350
I can only buy from Mexico Tamron, Sigma has its restrictions. I will not regret? the sony is very expensive and I've seen have poor quality lenses.
Which poor quality Sony lenses?
The purpose of the review is to give you the reader some insight on the performance of the lens so you can make the determination of whether or not it is of value/high quality to you (in regards to your question about Tamron).
But which Sony lenses are:
A. Expensive
B. Of poor quality
That you refer too in your comments above? I am curious.
Thank you for commenting and I hope the review is helpful in your decision process.
Carl