kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

I’m sure this question has been asked before, so forgive me, please, if I didn’t look back to check. But I need something in this range for my D7100. The Tamron, new, is about half the price of the Nikon refurb. I’ve read here on UHH that the Tamron is slower to focus. My question is just how much slower is it, and would that be significant to me? I won’t be doing much action photography, other than the occasional air show once a year or so. I’ve also read that the Nikon is built better. Another consideration is that refurb gear carries only a 90-day warranty whereas the new Tamron has a 6-year warranty.

Since many of you have used both of these lenses, your preferences and opinions are important to me.

As an alternative, Tamron also makes a 16-300, which is still considerably less than the Nikon refurb. I’m just a little antsy about paying less and “getting” less, if that makes sense.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

The Nikon 18-300 is a DX lens. It's not as sharp as the Nikon FX 28-300mm. The Nikon 18-300mm may not have a significant edge over the Tamron 16-300mm. The Tamron 16-300mm with a 6 year warranty is your best option IMO. Nikon high end lenses are generally superior to Tamron.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Spend some time before you spend some money. Try these lens comparison sites.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/lenses
http://lenshero.com/lens-comparison
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx
http://www.lenstip.com/lenses.html
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare
http://www.lenscore.org/

avemal Loc: BALTIMORE

I would go with the Tamron 16-300. I have been usung the 18-270 90% of the time . (Walkaround) & could not be happier.

CO

I know that with Tamron's new SP series prime lenses they traded off a little focusing speed in favor of focusing accuracy. I read in a review that the engineers made focusing accuracy their highest priority with the new SP lenses. I bought their new 45mm f/1.8 and have been impressed with its focusing accuracy and repeatability. I don't know if that's why the Tamron 18-270mm focuses a little slowly.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Good advice from all. Thank you. With what I do and with my eyes, focus accuracy IS more crucial than speed. Thanks again. I'll look at the links.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Although I am not a fan of such large focal lengths in a zoom my choice goes to the Nikon lens.

Leon S Loc: Minnesota

I have never been disappointed with Nikon, but I can't say the same for Tamron. Now the only non Nikon I own is a Tamron 11-18 dx we got for almost nothing. It does the job, but barely.

Unclewiggley Loc: Winter Haven, FL

Been using the Tamaron 18-270 for a couple of years and am pretty happy with it. The only problem is that it creeps.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

There's no zoom lock?

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

Which Nikkor 18-300mm lens? The heavy expensive one or the lighter one that is $300 less expensive?

catgirl Loc: las vegas

yes there is a lock to stop it from creeping

Bill Waxman Loc: Friday Harbor, San Juan Island, Washington

I have the D7100 and the older Tamron 18-270mm DII lens (B003). My guess is that the newer version is a little quicker to focus than mine but no better. I might have been lucky with my example of the lens but am quite satisfied with the results.

Attached is a shot I took on Monday this week with it at 18mm using BASIC, SMALL settings Auto Focus etc.. Not anywhere near the high resolution capability of the camera yet... Edge to edge sharpness with great latitude and not processed at all, just the way the image came out of the camera.

If I did any post processing I might straighten the horizon just a tad as my typical slightly less than level stance has placed the right side lower than the left but, what the heck.

Can't guaranty that you will get his result with another Tamron, if you choose to buy one, but I have used mine on my D7000, D1x, D7100 and will likely continue to use it when I get my D500 in a few months. No reason at all to change horses to something heavier or larger or more costly. I also have the 80-200mm f2.8, 300mm f4.0, 50mm f1.4 and the old but astoundingly sharp 28-70mm f2.8 AFS SW Nikon lenses. My "walk-around lens is the Tamron.

For reference, the view is from South Beach on San Juan Island, WA looking roughly south toward the Olympic Mountain range looking over the Straight of Juan de Fuca.

Bill Waxman

PVR8 Loc: Raleigh, NC

I think you'd be very happy with the Tamron 16-300. It's quite a bit faster focusing than the 18-270 and it has been given higher ratings than the Nikon 18-300. I recently was deciding between the Tamron 16-300, Sigma 18-300 and Nikon 18-300 to use on my D7000. I decided to go with the Tamron 16-300 and I'm very happy with the Tamron, it was also the best bang for the buck out of the three.

fishone0 Loc: Kingman AZ

just bought the heavier 18 to 300mm lens and yes I will say that it is worth the money I have had Tamron lenses and they don't compare any where to this Nikon If you have the money I say go for it. If you don't have the money for it the Sigma 18 to 300mm got a better rating than the Tamron 16 to 300mm