Tamron 70-300mm VC

[vindex1963]

I sold my Nikon 70-300mm VR to buy this lens.
The Nikon seemed to fall down at 300mm and this lens
stays sharp all the way up to 300mm wide open.

D40
f/5
1/50
185mm
ISO400

f/5.6
1/40
300mm
ISO400

 

[Nikon_Josh]

Great sharpness on the tammy! I am impressed by this lens.

But I have always thought the sharpness issues at 300mm on the 70-300mm VR are overemphasised, I have got some sharp enough shots at 300mm with my 70-300 VR. Yes the lens loses some its sharpness close to 300mm, but I have never really found it that noticeable. I also hear Nikon's version of VR is more effective than Tamron's implementation of VC. So I guess everything has it's pro's and con's.

 

[nickzou]

Hmmm... this is interesting to me. I have the Nikon 70-300mm VR. Never thought a Tamron would eve be better than a Nikon.

 

[mnhoj]

I think the Nikon 300mm weakness is over emphasized as well.

Both lenses give excellent results throughout the range.

But, I do believe the Tamron 70-300 VC to be more effective than the 70-300's VR.

 

[vindex1963]

Both do give excellent results but the Tamron has the edge having owned both.
Color, contrast and sharpness for sure goes to the Tamron. I had buyers remorse
after buying the Nikon but not with the Tamron. The Nikon fan club doesn't like
my opinion but you have to judge what you've owned and I've owned both.

 

[onerugrat]

Vindex, im just curious, what kind of ambient light did you have? did you use any other flash? Im thinking this would be a great way to get in close on a budget

 

[vindex1963]

The pendant was hanging on a desk light and that was all the light. The shot was hand held.
No flash.

 

[mnhoj]

Both do give excellent results but the Tamron has the edge having owned both.
Color, contrast and sharpness for sure goes to the Tamron. I had buyers remorse
after buying the Nikon but not with the Tamron. The Nikon fan club doesn't like
my opinion but you have to judge what you've owned and I've owned both.

I've owned multiple copies of both and will agree with you.

IMO, there isn't one clear advantage for the Nikon except the fact that I live ten minutes away from Nikon El Segundo.
Which I've had to visit due to faulty VR in one of the 70-300s I've owned.

If I ever do get another 70-300(which is likely) it'll be the Tamron.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

Both do give excellent results but the Tamron has the edge having owned both.
Color, contrast and sharpness for sure goes to the Tamron. I had buyers remorse
after buying the Nikon but not with the Tamron. The Nikon fan club doesn't like
my opinion but you have to judge what you've owned and I've owned both.

It's not about being part of a Nikon fan club, I recommend the Sigma 50 1.4 over any Nikon 50 time and time again. The Tamron has a slight edge perhaps! But I stil feel the Nikon can get sharp results at 300mm and it is completely overstated that the lens goes soft at 300mm.

 

[vindex1963]

It's not about being part of a Nikon fan club, I recommend the Sigma 50 1.4 over any Nikon 50 time and time again. The Tamron has a slight edge perhaps! But I stil feel the Nikon can get sharp results at 300mm and it is completely overstated that the lens goes soft at 300mm.

Mine did and the one I owned is all I have to compare to.

Side by side the Tamron beats the Nikon is every way
again from the one I owned.

 

[BlairWright]

great results. Honestly I am pleasantly surprised