Tamron 18-200 lens. VR or no VR?

[the.j129]

If you are wishing you had a 70-200 f/2.8 and are already at the $650 budget, save a month or so and go with the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8
AF001N700 Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 DI LD (IF) Macro, Fast AF Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon AF Mount - USA Warranty

oh that 70-200 was a typo. i actually want ONE lens. that will let me do everything. And that will have some semblance of quality.
I was sightseeing in the summer and I was so frustrated because I had to constantly change lens between the nikkor 18-55 and 55-200.

so i just want one that will do it all.

 

[the.j129]

There was amazing photography long before there was VR/VC/IS/OS.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

 

[usayit]

Zoom lock on 18-270 is at 18 otherwise there is no lock that I know of. It's not great for low light photography because it starts at f3.5 and goes to 6.3, I try to stay under 2.8 if the lighting is not ideal.

I just found it strange that both website made it a point to mention the zoom lock feature on the 18-200 but didn't mention it for the 18-270.

AF18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD; Tamron USA, Inc.

Last time I checked, its the same as the 18-200mm in terms of functionality. Zoom creep is generally a common thing with megazooms at this price range.


Don't think of low-light versus lots of light. Think in terms of stops. If you normally can handhold a 200mm lens at 1/500 then IS might help you bring that down to 1/250 or 1/125th. "Might" is important as it depends on how steady of a shooter you are. Remember, this only helps with camera shake and not subject movement. Its not a magic thing.... in general, tripod or monopod is better but its nice to have. As I said, you shouldn't worry too much between VC versus non-VC. I would be more concern with image quality of the 18-200mm versus 18-270mm. The former is a rather old lens design (I think the 1st tamron super-zoom specifically for APS crop cameras).

 

[usayit]

PS.. no stupid questions have been asked....

 

[MLeeK]

I am just not a fan of the all around lenses, but then I use the 70-200 as my almost everything lens-both on crop sensor and full frame. My other lenses collect dust... A LOT.
If you are buying an all around make sure it's the best you can buy.
There is compromise in quality on the mega zooms like that because the lens has to work over such a long range of the zoom. You are also talking lenses that REQUIRE you to shoot in the full light of day or add light. They are not lenses you can expect to shoot indoors without flash at all with. The VR/VC/IS/OS helps with that immensely. f/6.3 requires A LOT of light when you have to be at a shutter of 1/500 to avoid shake... A portrait in the lovely evening light at that would probably require you to use flash as even maxing your ISO won't get your exposure up there.

Set your current lens at 6.3 and spend a day shooting in all kinds of light with it there.

 

[the.j129]

I am just not a fan of the all around lenses, but then I use the 70-200 as my almost everything lens-both on crop sensor and full frame. My other lenses collect dust... A LOT.
If you are buying an all around make sure it's the best you can buy.

so what happens when you're trying to shoot something between 18-70? I mean, even today, I was trying to take a few shots of the golf course across the street from me...i had to keep shifting between the 2 lenses. got a little frustrating.

 

[the.j129]

If you are buying an all around make sure it's the best you can buy.
There is compromise in quality on the mega zooms like that because the lens has to work over such a long range of the zoom. .

so would you consider the 18-270 VC a good lens? honest opinion.

 

[the.j129]

The VR/VC/IS/OS helps with that immensely. f/6.3 requires A LOT of light when you have to be at a shutter of 1/500 to avoid shake... A portrait in the lovely evening light at that would probably require you to use flash as even maxing your ISO won't get your exposure up there.

I didn't follow this bit. so if i bought the 18-270 VC, you're saying i still wouldn't be able to shoot in the evening light without flash? or were you talking about being unable to take photographs at f/6.3 if i DIDN'T have VC.
just a little confused.

 

[MLeeK]

I guess I don't generally shoot anything that close to me. I shoot a lot of sports, portraits and weddings. The wide angles get me into trouble with distortion problems. I use it for family portraits and stuff like that, but the longer focal lengths are just what I am all about. I'd love to trade in my 17-50 f/2.8 (which is useless on a full frame, can't use it) for an 85mm f/1.4. Not gonna happen-price is an object here.

 

[the.j129]

PS.. no stupid questions have been asked....

thanks! I was so afraid of sounding stupid!

I'm new to this field. and just learning. I'm reading up a lot on this...but so much of it doesn't make sense...and i don't really have anybody I can ask. But thanks anyway.

Now medicine...or computers. that's my field of expertise.

 

[MLeeK]

If you are buying an all around make sure it's the best you can buy.
There is compromise in quality on the mega zooms like that because the lens has to work over such a long range of the zoom. .

so would you consider the 18-270 VC a good lens? honest opinion.

MY opinion on it isn't going to do you any good. I don't like the all in ones and I wouldn't shoot with one. I won't shoot with anything that isn't a constant f/ of 2.8 or better for the most part. There are only about 3 or 4 variable f/ lenses I would own and they're not any where near that long of a zoom. However, unlike you I am a professional, so there is a big difference between what is good for me and for you.

As for consumer lenses? It's not bad. Vacation lens or scouting lens? It's not bad. There are some guys on here who will give you an opinion that is better suited to your use of it than I can.

 

[shootermcgavin]

The 18-270 is a good walking lens, it's a great never have to switch take it with the kids trick or treating, to a baseball game, to somewhere you don't want to have a ton of lenses but realize you might miss a shot due to light and may not be getting the best crisp image possible from a lens. I'll be buying a 15-50 and 70-200 also but then you're talking another $2500. You gotta buy for what fits your shooting style and what makes sense price wise to you.

 

[the.j129]

The 18-270 is a good walking lens, it's a great never have to switch

so you've used it? what's the quality like? at the ends? 18mm and 270mm?

 

[the.j129]

If you are buying an all around make sure it's the best you can buy.
There is compromise in quality on the mega zooms like that because the lens has to work over such a long range of the zoom. .

so would you consider the 18-270 VC a good lens? honest opinion.

MY opinion on it isn't going to do you any good. I don't like the all in ones and I wouldn't shoot with one. I won't shoot with anything that isn't a constant f/ of 2.8 or better for the most part. There are only about 3 or 4 variable f/ lenses I would own and they're not any where near that long of a zoom. However, unlike you I am a professional, so there is a big difference between what is good for me and for you.

As for consumer lenses? It's not bad. Vacation lens or scouting lens? It's not bad. There are some guys on here who will give you an opinion that is better suited to your use of it than I can.

thank you for your help anyway!