Manufacture Discontinued Lens: I found this lens on Amazon.com and was wondering if anybody has used this lens and whether you have any insight on whether it would be a good all round...

maggiemae Loc: North Carolina

I found this lens on Amazon.com and was wondering if anybody has used this lens and whether you have any insight on whether it would be a good all round lens. I like the price on it but am concerned that it has been discontinued. I am considering purchasing a D3300 and am trying to decide the best combination of lens that will get me the best bang for my buck. I am thinking about a lens like this and a 35mm f/1.8. This will give me more range than the two kit lens that I can get with a bundle and would mean less lens changing. I am a beginner to DSLR. Any advice would be appreciated! Thanks.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

maggiemae wrote:

I found this lens on Amazon.com and was wondering ... (show quote)

That lens was replaced by the Tamron 16-300mm model. It is an OK lens and well thought of 6 or 7 years ago. The first generation of it was actually sharper than the srcond generation (PZD) version. It would work fine on your D3300 and yield comparable images to the two base kit lenses.

maggiemae Loc: North Carolina

Thank you. I think I am driving myself a little crazy trying to figure out what to purchase. I want to make sure I get the best combination that will make me happy and last me a while. It is a rather large purchase for me and it may be awhile before I can upgrade to anything else so I want to get a couple of lenses that I can learn with. But that will give me a good range to play with.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

maggiemae wrote:

... I am considering purchasing a D3300 and am trying to decide the best combination of lens that will get me the best bang for my buck. ... I am a beginner to DSLR. Any advice would be appreciated! Thanks.

Lenses are big $$$$ item and you will end up with a wide range covering the gambit. Mid 1980s Minolta autofocus lenses are direct Sony fits. Millions were made and are considered good glass. While the crowd follow the Canon/Nikon hype in sync step mooing as they walk... Sony is the camera has won Camera of the Year award during the decade. Why not go Sony and have money for more lenses. I bought 3 on www.shopgoodwill.com for $55 including shipping...

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

maggiemae wrote:

I found this lens on Amazon.com and was wondering ... (show quote)

I wouldn't be concerned about it being discontinued. Repairs won't be possible at some time in the future, but they probably won't be necessary, anyway. If the specs and price appeal to you, go for it!

rdubreuil Loc: Dummer, NH USA

dpullum wrote:

Lenses are big $$$$ item and you will end up with a wide range covering the gambit. Mid 1980s Minolta autofocus lenses are direct Sony fits. Millions were made and are considered good glass. While the crowd follow the Canon/Nikon hype in sync step mooing as they walk... Sony is the camera has won Camera of the Year award during the decade. Why not go Sony and have money for more lenses. I bought 3 on www.shopgoodwill.com for $55 including shipping...

So what makes a Sony fan boy any different?

BebuLamar

dpullum wrote:

Lenses are big $$$$ item and you will end up with a wide range covering the gambit. Mid 1980s Minolta autofocus lenses are direct Sony fits. Millions were made and are considered good glass. While the crowd follow the Canon/Nikon hype in sync step mooing as they walk... Sony is the camera has won Camera of the Year award during the decade. Why not go Sony and have money for more lenses. I bought 3 on www.shopgoodwill.com for $55 including shipping...

An answer to a question that wasn't asked.

deer2ker Loc: Nashville, TN

Personally I would go for the newer 18-300mm or one of the Nikon's 18-200mm refurbished. I think the consensus on that one that I have seen is it's a little soft. It depends on how much you will use it and if you think you will want to upgrade. I've gotten really great pics with my 55-200mm on my D5500 and wouldn't give it up (it's cheap!) and I might swing for a lens to cover the low end with a better lens. I am no expert though and to be honest, I use my 50mm and my wide angle more with the pics I like to take ;)

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

dpullum wrote:

While the crowd follow the Canon/Nikon hype in sync step mooing as they walk... .

Congratulations, you are a dedicated Sony fanboy. Now stop mansplaining and answer the question. The OP, who has stated she has limited budget for this Tamron lens is not going to go shell out $3000+ for a A7R and even more for the G-Master lenses.

To the OP: Go ahead, buy it. Have a great time. Post some images that will make fanboys jealous.

rdubreuil Loc: Dummer, NH USA

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

Congratulations, you are a dedicated Sony fanboy. Now stop mansplaining and answer the question. The OP, who has stated she has limited budget for this Tamron lens is not going to go shell out $3000+ for a A7R and even more for the G-Master lenses.

To the OP: Go ahead, buy it. Have a great time. Post some images that will make fanboys jealous.

doclrb

As you have written, one must be happy with a purchased lens for quite a while. Before you pull the trigger, you might consider looking for the 16 to 300 at KEH or Adorama in used condition.

Les

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

MT Shooter wrote:

That lens was replaced by the Tamron 16-300mm model. It is an OK lens and well thought of 6 or 7 years ago. The first generation of it was actually sharper than the srcond generation (PZD) version. It would work fine on your D3300 and yield comparable images to the two base kit lenses.

While Tamron is an okay brand, I got burned by purchasing a Tamron 10-24mm DX wide zoom. The lens is moderately okay at 12 or 13 to 24mm but fisheyes at 10-12mm. I've used the Nikkor 10-24mm DX and their 14-24mm FX and both (while more expensive than the Tamron) were heads and shoulders better in quality and performance. I have a Nikkor 18-70mm DX lens that I will go to quicker than the 10-24mm Tamron because of the quality of the image at wide angle. It's just my opinion, but if I had the $1000 back that I paid for the Tamron, I would put some with it and get the better lens.

maggiemae Loc: North Carolina

Thank you all for the advice. I am still researching but your helpful comments have been a big help. : )

OlinBost Loc: Marietta, Ga.

Thanks for the link for Goodwill. I just placed a bit on a camera that I want.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

dcampbell52 wrote:

While Tamron is an okay brand, I got burned by pur... (show quote)

If you paid $1000 for a $499 Tamron lens then I certainly don't feel sorry for your problems. By the way, its one of the very highest rated crop sensor ultra wides on the market so clearly your purported problem is not the standard.