Nikon 70-300 or Tamron 70-210

[Timppa]

I agree...

I will definitely try it out and play around with it, I will let you know my verdict later this month ^^

Focal lengths are calculated at Infinity; it is possible, quite likely in fact, that there is some loss of effective focal length, at shorter distances.

I was thinking this as well, that's why I made it clear I did some test indoors.

 

[Derrel]

The .8 stop difference seems like a lot...and is kind of disconcerting. The "f/4" of the Tamron sounds kind of optimistic.

 

[Timppa]

A few more tests done indoors.
The Nikon does appear brighter, but my previous post seems bit optimistic, perhaps there was a change in ambient light. But half a stop is true.
The focal length is less of a difference with objects that are further away (5m and up) (, just like you said Derrel)
the VR on the Nikon works better then the VC on the Tamron, Nikon claims 4.5stops, I can say this feels true.
The Tamron feels more like 3stops only. So for travelling, the Nikon is the clear winner overall.
The handling of the Tamron is less of an issue than expected (like you said, ac12), it kind of feels nice and more balanced.
sharpness is overall similar, perhaps a bit less on the tamron at f4 compared to the Nikon wide open.
the bokeh on the Tamron is softer and better than the Nikon, of course because of the f/4. When you put the Tamron 210mm f/4 VS nikon 300mm F/5.6, the Tamron still has more DoF and nicer results.
The Tamron indoors and with flash, for events and people, creates excellent results.
the Nikon indoors with flash also creates very sharp and good results, but could use more DoF.
If I think about the amount of times I shoot events or go outdoors, I should go for the Nikon.
But I still want to go test more outdoors!
I once went out already with the Nikon, and was actually not so happy, specially when trying to take image of flowers, they never seemed sharp. But this could be blamed to me, for being to excited and forgetting to check my settings ^^

 

[Timppa]

Alright, I have been out for some days taking pictures.
I am a bit torn between the two, I think both have some issues (maybe because they are used lenses?)
both are not so great with tracking birds, Nikon 70-300 is slightly better, but for example compared to my 200-500 lens, both fail.
the Tamron is bit soft wide open at f4
the Nikon is sharper
Tamron has better bokeh
Nikon seems to have VR issues, it jumps a bit around after every picture I take (at 300mm), and I can't seem to take sharp images at lowe shutterspeeds (under 1/100), I got a few, but little...

Should i return both? XD

 

[ac12]

. . . .

Nikon seems to have VR issues, it jumps a bit around after every picture I take (at 300mm), and I can't seem to take sharp images at lowe shutterspeeds (under 1/100), I got a few, but little...

Should i return both? XD

If you suspect the VR needs repair, return it, the cost of repair will make the lens exchange very expensive.
My 70-200/4 is in the shop for a VR repair, and the estimate is over $450USD.

 

[Timppa]

. . . .

Nikon seems to have VR issues, it jumps a bit around after every picture I take (at 300mm), and I can't seem to take sharp images at lowe shutterspeeds (under 1/100), I got a few, but little...

Should i return both? XD

If you suspect the VR needs repair, return it, the cost of repair will make the lens exchange very expensive.
My 70-200/4 is in the shop for a VR repair, and the estimate is over $450USD.

Today I will test the VR all the time, I read that I should get stable shots up to 1/25sec, but I will try mostly around 1/50 to 1/100. If it can't handle it, I will return it.
I will probably return both then. The Tamron feels great, but the softness at f4 bothers me...
Maybe the Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 made me spoiled with all the sharpness, no lens compares any more!

 

[ac12]

. . . .

Nikon seems to have VR issues, it jumps a bit around after every picture I take (at 300mm), and I can't seem to take sharp images at lowe shutterspeeds (under 1/100), I got a few, but little...

Should i return both? XD

If you suspect the VR needs repair, return it, the cost of repair will make the lens exchange very expensive.
My 70-200/4 is in the shop for a VR repair, and the estimate is over $450USD.

Today I will test the VR all the time, I read that I should get stable shots up to 1/25sec, but I will try mostly around 1/50 to 1/100. If it can't handle it, I will return it.
I will probably return both then. The Tamron feels great, but the softness at f4 bothers me...
Maybe the Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 made me spoiled with all the sharpness, no lens compares any more!

I hope they still have your Nikon 16-80.

 

[Timppa]

. . . .

Nikon seems to have VR issues, it jumps a bit around after every picture I take (at 300mm), and I can't seem to take sharp images at lowe shutterspeeds (under 1/100), I got a few, but little...

Should i return both? XD

If you suspect the VR needs repair, return it, the cost of repair will make the lens exchange very expensive.
My 70-200/4 is in the shop for a VR repair, and the estimate is over $450USD.

Today I will test the VR all the time, I read that I should get stable shots up to 1/25sec, but I will try mostly around 1/50 to 1/100. If it can't handle it, I will return it.
I will probably return both then. The Tamron feels great, but the softness at f4 bothers me...
Maybe the Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 made me spoiled with all the sharpness, no lens compares any more!

I hope they still have your Nikon 16-80.

I get the financial part of it, the tamron was at 400eur and the nikon at 259eur.
I got 600eur for the 16-80 (paying a small surplus for the other 2).
Anyway, if I return only tamron, I'll get 400 back .

I did some more tests now outdoors with vr in the forest, seems like it does do a decent job. But when the object is closer than 2m and to full 300mm extend, then it really lacks.
Maybe I have been testing it wrong before.
At macro distances it should be more tricky anyway.

I'll still do some tests indoors later this week.
If i notice the vr is actually good, I will keep the Nikon.
The Tamron I will return because I find it to soft at f/4, and i do feel the 210mm is a bit to short for birds.

 

[Timppa]

I feel a bit torn here!
even in my writing here in different posts I am contradicting myself.
I feel like one moment the VR works great on the Nikon, and the next moment it's not.
I did some test in the forest and out of 5 shots of some lumber at 1/50s and 300mm i got 0 good ones
then I did the same with 1/20s and 4/5 were good!
I did some more things like this, and I seem to get better results at 1/20 or 1/25 then I get at 1/50 up to 1/100
I will go back to the store (this week or the next) and ask to test a new copy of the lens, but also the DX version of the lens. Also ask the shopkeepers to have a go.

 

[Timppa]

For anyone who cares, after all my babeling in previous post, I have returned the tamron 70-210.
The reason is that I find it to soft at f4 to use. The bokeh is great, but I only get decent sharpness at f5 (and so loses the point of having a f4 lens).
The nikon 70-300 is sharp already starting at f5.6 and goes to 300mm, so I kept that one
The vr works great, It was just me demanding to much xD. I get sharp pictures even at 1/20s!
And the jumping vr was because I shaked to much, so the vr just jumped back. If I hold the camera more steady, I don't have that at all. (I also noticed this on my 200-500).

Some images I took with the Nikkon 70-300 FX AFP

TMT_1263edit by Timothy D'hondt

TMT_1179edit by Timothy D'hondt

TMT_0380edit by Timothy D'hondt

 

[Derrel]

Glad you've got yourself a decent 70-300.