Tamron 16/300Lens
Dec 29, 2017 18:41:30 #
jrcarpe
Loc: Jacksonville,AR
Would love to hear others opinions of this lens. All replies are appreciated.
Dec 30, 2017 06:45:17 #
jrcarpe wrote:
Would love to hear others opinions of this lens. All replies are appreciated.
I have one on my D7200, and I love it. VR on it is really good.
Ken S.
Dec 30, 2017 07:23:43 #
I have that lens on my D3200. It is a very good walk around lens. it can be a bit slow to focus some times but I think that is just as much the fault of the camera body.
Dec 30, 2017 07:31:27 #
I have one on my D7100. No complaints since it fit into my budget. It is my all around lens. You may want to consider the newer 18 to 400 that is out.
Dec 30, 2017 08:12:43 #
leftj
Loc: Texas
MT native wrote:
I have one on my D7100. No complaints since it fit into my budget. It is my all around lens. You may want to consider the newer 18 to 400 that is out.
Good advice. I had the 16-300mm for about a year and was very pleased with it's performance. When the 18-400mm was introduced I sold the 16-300mm and got it for the extra reach. IMO the 18-400mm is even better than the 16-300mm. If you go with the 16-300mm you will like it but you'll be wishing you had the 18-400mm.
Dec 30, 2017 08:54:33 #
BobT
Loc: southern Minnesota
Which lens does better at it's full tele range, especially for sharpness--the 16-300 at 300mm or the 18-400mm at 400mm?
Dec 30, 2017 09:50:30 #
jrcarpe wrote:
I had the 70-300 Tamron lens and liked it a lot but I wanted a little on both ends so I bought the Tamron 18-400 lens which I really like and will be my main walk around lens. Here are a few examples of this lens. All being used on Canon 80D. The first three are at 400mm and the fourth is at 50mm....RichWould love to hear others opinions of this lens. All replies are appreciated.
Dec 30, 2017 10:01:41 #
BobT
Loc: southern Minnesota
The pictures speak well for the lens at both extremes. Thanks for posting the samples.
Dec 30, 2017 10:09:10 #
I had the 16-300 for Canons, but was unable to get really sharp images at either extreme. Now have the 18-400, the long settings work OK, but have real problems under 50mm. Can get sharp when close, but most landscape type shots have not been sharp under 50mm. Could just be me. But, not real pleased with either lens.
Dec 30, 2017 10:34:31 #
jrcarpe wrote:
Would love to hear others opinions of this lens. All replies are appreciated.
It has been my daily walkaround lens since March 2017. I'm quite happy with it, and since I also have the Tamron 150-600, I had no reason to consider the 18-400 when it came out.
Dec 30, 2017 11:29:59 #
I really like this lens on my 7D MKII it has worked better after I calibrated it to my camera (I use FoCal software for that) It is not as sharp as my 100-400 L but not as heavy or expensive it was even short enough to be allowed into Miller Park for a Milwaukee Brewers Ball Game
Dec 30, 2017 12:07:07 #
Dec 30, 2017 12:37:14 #
Picture Taker
Loc: Michigan Thumb
16X300 is good lens but I had to go to the 28X300 as it focuses faster. Found shooting action the 18 was too slow. Asked Tamron rep and he set me to the 28 and its fine. I lost mu wide end
Dec 30, 2017 12:39:32 #
Dec 30, 2017 12:59:10 #
bigwolf40 wrote:
I had the 70-300 Tamron lens and liked it a lot but I wanted a little on both ends so I bought the Tamron 18-400 lens which I really like and will be my main walk around lens. Here are a few examples of this lens. All being used on Canon 80D. The first three are at 400mm and the fourth is at 50mm....Rich
Those are great Rich!! I just purchased the 18-400 last week when Tamron Day, was at my camera store. I have it on my Canon 7D. Hope I can do as good as you
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.