Not happy with my Tamron 18-270, any suggestions?

[Chris Overson]

Hi all, I'm new to the forum and could use some advice.

I've been using a Tamron 18-250mm for well over a year now and very happy with the results, however the lack of stabilisation was an issue for me as I'd quite often be shooting in poor light.

After doing some research I bought a used 18-270mm VC model. I'm very impressed with the VC and it holds the pictures perfectly steady, but the sharpness is noticably worse than my old lens.

I went out today in bright sunshine to take some photos of gulls down at the beach. Took a few hundred with each lens, trying various shutter speeds and apertures, and even at f11 the images from the 18-270 do not look sharp at full zoom.

I realise that superzooms are compromise lenses, and I plan on purchasing the 70-300mm VC model soon, but I really wanted a good walkabout lens for when it's not practical to be swapping.

Is there any possible fix? Or should I just sell it? I can post samples if required.

Cheers guys!

 

[UjaiDidida]

Hi there!

I'm looking for long focal lens too, surveyed many affordable lens and ends up getting a Canon 55-250mm IS STM to replace my broken Tamron 70-300. I already have an 18-55 kit so lenses starting at 55mm is enough for me. Check this out, Flickr Discussing Has anyone tried the new STM version of 55-250 which was just released in Canon EF-S 55-250 f4-5.6 IS Tons of positive reviews for its great focusing and sharpness compared with the other lenses (even compared with the higher end lenses) is what makes me really starved for it.

 

[Braineack]

looks to be soft in the corners: Tamron AF 18-270mm f 3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD - Review Test Report - Analysis

but the overall sharpness measures higher than the 18-250: Tamron AF 18-250mm f 3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical IF macro Canon - Review Test Report - Analysis

 

[shadowlands]

I once owned the Nikon 18-200 & Nikon 18-300. I loved 'em both. But all in all, sharpness wasn't great. So I've moved on from those "do it all" lenses.
I've never tried the Tamron.

 

[Derrel]

I got a great deal on one of the earlier Tamron superzooms, I want to say a 28-270mm...this was in 2007, and I bought it used for $100. Used on the 12-MP D2x, it just was not a sharp lens...I ended up gifting it to a nice grandmother who used it for grandkid pics on her Nikon D50, and it was pretty good for her needs. It was a lot worse than the Nikon 28-200. Superzooms are more about convenience than quality, and many of them were designed for 8 to 12 MP cameras, so on newer, higher resolution cameras, their flaws are shown more clearly.

On the other hand are lenses like the 55-200 and 55-250 and 70-300 zooms which are tele-zooms: they are ALWAYS telephoto lenses. Eliminating the need to drop into the wide-angle region makes tele-zooms MUCH sharper, and MUCH easier to engineer, and easier to build. ALWAYS-tele zooms are much easier to build than the "crossover" type zooms.

 

[Chris Overson]

Thanks guys. I think I may have a defective copy to be honest in this case. I understand you can't expect miricles from a superzoom, but the 18-270 is much worse in clarity than the 18-250. I've done some side by side comparisons, and even at f11 the difference is noticable.

Could it be a calibration issue? I have a 700d and can't do AF microadjustments. I've been tempted to upgrade to the 70d anyway, could this be an idea?

 

[jaomul]

Is it under warranty, if yes, then send it back. There is a difference between defective and not super sharp

 

[ruifo]

I have a "Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM" super-zoom, and I like it. It suffers of all problems that any super-zoom suffers from, but it's nice enough for days I want to go light with the D5200, with no major expection on the shooting.

Here same samples:
Sigma 18-250mm f 3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM - an album on Flickr

Like these:



The Look by ruimc77, on Flickr



Bee by ruimc77, on Flickr



Pier by ruimc77, on Flickr

 

[Chris Overson]

Some great pictures there with your Sigma!

I don't think I have any kind of warrranty as I bought the lens used on ebay. To give you an idea, I went out yesterday and took around 700 pictures, 300+ with both the 18-250 and the 18-270.

Out of 300 pictures these are the sharpest, most had to be binned. Taken with 270:

1/400sec, f8, iso 100

Not too bad but not really sharp. I tried taking aerial shots of the gulls flying about but all were soft/blurred, nothing really crisp at all with this lens.

Again with the 18-270:

1/400sec, f7.1, iso 400



Taken with old 18-250mm:

1/1250sec, f7.1, iso 200

1/320sec, f6.3, iso 800

1/250sec, f9, iso 100


It might be just me but all the photos from the 18-250 (I've taken a lot with it) just seem so much clearer than the 18-270.

Should I just sell the 18-270 and buy a dedicated tele lens instead, keeping the 18-250 as a lazy walk-about? I've been looking at either the Tamron 70-300 VC, or the Canon 55-250mm IS STM. I don't really do any video work so silent AF isn't necessary.

If I could calibrate or improve the 18-270 somehow I'd love it, as the VC is brilliant. It just isn't sharp enough for me.

Thanks!

 

[jaomul]

The sigma is clearly better. Maybe you can get the Tamron serviced. Did you by any chance get it a lot cheaper than it should have been, there is a possible reason it was sold

 

[ruifo]

No doubt the old 18-250mm shots were better...

 

[Chris Overson]

I think I paid the going rate for it, it's in very good condition, came boxed with two filters, hood, manual etc. I was all excited when I played with it at home then went out to take some pictures and they're all kinda "meh".

Do I need to find someone to service/calibrate the lens then? I mainly shoot at the long end anyway as I prefer close-ups to landscapes, but it's nice to be able to pan out and take a shot without having to swap. I'm definitely going to buy a dedicated long zoom but I'd really like to save this one.

What could I expect to pay out for a service?

 

[Chris Overson]

Just a quick update, did some reading round and decided to attempt to "calibrate" the lens myself a little. I've stripped down and reconditioned a few lenses as I like taking things apart. My 50mm 1.4 I bought broken on ebay (wouldn't focus) and repaired it following a youtube video.

I removed the rear cover of the lens to expose the two thick metal shims and thin copper one (see below):

Being careful not to damage the ribbon cable to the connector, I removed one shim and re-assembled, took a few pictures then repeated the process removing both shims.

Here's a comparison (it's late here and nothing interesting to photograph, so I used a hard drive):

All three images were taken on a tripod with identical settings (270mm, f6.3, iso 100, 1/15sec, remote shutter). Focus should be on the circle with 20 in the middle.

The difference is not very noticable here, and it doesn't help that the text is low resolution to begin with. Personally I feel that the bottom image with both shims removed is the sharpest.

Taking shots of other various items around the room it feels to me that with the shims removed the lens is consistently sharper, and focuses quicker at longer focal lengths. I did notice it tended to hunt a little at wide angle.

I won't be able to post any definite results until I get out in the sunshine (hopefully soon) but I'm optimistic that I could be onto something.

Hopefully this might help someone else - I'll continue to post results.

Thanks very much for your help and input guys!

 

[Chris Overson]

Went out today and took a few more photos with the 18-270. Not the best conditions, but I think it might be slightly improved.

Here's the best two:

1/500sec, f6.3, iso 100

1/400sec, f6.3, iso 800

Before it was fairly soft at f8 or f11, both of these are on f6.3 so I think there's an improvement there.

I'll probably try a couple more times before deciding whether to keep this lens. I'm thinking of selling it, keeping my old 18-250 and buying the 70-300mm VC tamron as for the most part when I'm using this lens it's at the long end anyway.

 

[Chris Overson]

Just an update for anyone who's interested .

I've put my tamron up for sale, and traded in my old 18-250mm against a new Sigma 18-250mm OS HSM, going on the results shown here.

Fingers crossed I'll get better results from it, although I'll be buying a tele soon.

Also purchased the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 which looks to be a great little lens, can't wait to try them both out properly

Thanks for the help guys!