70-300: Nikon or Tamron?
Mar 3, 2017 08:31:05 #
Nikon lenses are specifically made for Nikon bodies. Between f4.5 and f4 there is not such a big difference. Paying $20 more for a lens is not a heart broken deal.
Go with Nikon.
Go with Nikon.
Mar 3, 2017 08:55:44 #
Both are good lens, Nikon will have a higher resale value. I shoot a D7200, all my lens are FF, they seem to be a little sharper.
Mar 3, 2017 08:55:44 #
Both are good lens, Nikon will have a higher resale value. I shoot a D7200, all my lens are FF, they seem to be a little sharper.
Mar 3, 2017 09:35:08 #
I use the Nikon DX 70-300 VR with my D7100 and D80; excellent results. With such a long lens I feel the VR is a necessity, not a luxury.
Mar 3, 2017 10:02:45 #
kb6kgx
Loc: Simi Valley, CA
billnikon wrote:
OME always, go with Nikon. Is there another choice?
Not really. No. 😜👍
Mar 3, 2017 10:54:25 #
photoman022
Loc: Manchester CT USA
BrettProbert wrote:
Nikon. Or you'll be crying on this forum in a few years.
Not true! I bought the Tamron 70-300 because I could afford it (the price difference at the time was astronomical). I've used it consistently for 8 years and I am still happy with it. If, at the time, the Nikon was on $20 more expensive, I would have gone with the Nikon. That being said, my Tammy gives consistently sharp photo and I'm glad I bought it.
Mar 3, 2017 11:08:47 #
I purchased a NEW Tamron 70-300 VC when I acquired my Nikon D7000.. The VC is incredible, and I've taken some great butterfly and hummingbird images with it..Also has a 6 year warranty, I got it on a rebate sale for $350 at the time..I've since purchased a Tamron 150-600mm G2, and I'm using it on my Nikon D500..The 200-500 Nikon was too heavy for me to hand-hold, and I wanted to be able to have the 150-600 span, especially when I need a closer shot..About the same price as the Nikon..But a better and more featured lens IMHO..And that 6 year warranty as well!!
Mar 3, 2017 12:14:47 #
I'm hoping it is the Nikkor. I just ordered the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED from Nikon. Refurbished it was $299.
Mar 3, 2017 12:18:11 #
kb6kgx wrote:
Looking at a 70-300 for my D7100. Tamron is f4.0 and Nikon is f4.5. Both variable to f5.6. Is 4.0 vs. 4.5 that significant? Only other difference is filter size. Tamron is 62mm, Nikon is 67mm.
Right now there is s $30 rebate on the Nikon which makes it only $20 more than the Tamron.
Wondering which way to go. Comments, suggestions and advice welcome.
Right now there is s $30 rebate on the Nikon which makes it only $20 more than the Tamron.
Wondering which way to go. Comments, suggestions and advice welcome.
-----
I've read that the Nikkor70-300VR will be replaced this year. That might explain the rebates. My brief experience with that lens is that it is very sharp at the wide end. It stays sharp up to about 220mm after which it goes downhill. For amateur use it is quite acceptable.
Buying Nikkor lenses assures you of future compatibility and future performance.
-----
Mar 3, 2017 13:15:00 #
Check the internet for reviews. The Tamron may not focus as fast as a Nikon lens on a Nikon camera. DxO is a great source if they have tested both lenses.
Mar 3, 2017 13:21:32 #
For me, even without the promotional discount it is a no-brainer. Quality costs money. Your techniques will improve with experience, you'll eventually need the quality. Buy it once.
Mar 3, 2017 13:50:44 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Birddog007 wrote:
I'm hoping it is the Nikkor. I just ordered the AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED from Nikon. Refurbished it was $299.
Mar 3, 2017 14:02:45 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
dpfoto wrote:
You have a NIKON camera, go with the NIKON lens. If you had a CANON camera, go with CANON lens, etc. I wouldn't THINK of going with an off-brand lens for my Nikons.
Mar 3, 2017 14:28:51 #
kb6kgx
Loc: Simi Valley, CA
photoman022 wrote:
Not true! I bought the Tamron 70-300 because I could afford it (the price difference at the time was astronomical). I've used it consistently for 8 years and I am still happy with it. If, at the time, the Nikon was on $20 more expensive, I would have gone with the Nikon. That being said, my Tammy gives consistently sharp photo and I'm glad I bought it.
You do the best you can do.
Mar 3, 2017 14:29:35 #
kb6kgx
Loc: Simi Valley, CA
cambriaman wrote:
For me, even without the promotional discount it is a no-brainer. Quality costs money. Your techniques will improve with experience, you'll eventually need the quality. Buy it once.
Absolutely.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.