Nikon vs Tamron lenses
Oct 18, 2017 13:37:57 #
janiebutz wrote:
Thank you all for your responses. Now comes the hard part....deciding! At this point I think the 16-300 wins!
I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 16-300.
Oct 18, 2017 13:44:02 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
Just saw a youtube comparison of superzooms. On average, out of a maximum score of 25, most were rated in the 13-15 range according to the testers criteria. Maybe a 70-200 with a 1.4 extender is a better option?
Oct 18, 2017 13:47:36 #
photoman022
Loc: Manchester CT USA
here's a review of the Tamron 16-300 for Canon; I'm sure the results for the Nikon can't be that different. I'm came across it just now, but remembered reading this post earlier.
https://digital-photography-school.com/review-tamron-16-300mm-f3-5-6-3-macro-lens/
https://digital-photography-school.com/review-tamron-16-300mm-f3-5-6-3-macro-lens/
Oct 18, 2017 14:33:11 #
sirlensalot wrote:
Just saw a youtube comparison of superzooms. On average, out of a maximum score of 25, most were rated in the 13-15 range according to the testers criteria. Maybe a 70-200 with a 1.4 extender is a better option?
I have that combo and agree, but some may not want the additional weight and $2500 to get there. The other caveat being the big lower end focal lengths lost. Depends on what needs you want to serve. To me, a walk around lens is lightweight with a 16 or 18mm to 300 or 400mm for wildlife. The Tamron 18-400 suits those needs for my wife. I carry two cameras, so I have different choices depending on where I'm going and how much I want to carry. I usually carry a 24-70 on a FF and a 200-500 on my DX.
Oct 18, 2017 15:13:18 #
Those wide range zooms are not great in quality and the wider you go, the worse they get. You are looking to rebuy a lot of mm range in your next lens and that does not make sense. Consider carrying two lenses right now (with the goal of eventually replacing that kit lens) and start getting yourself some quality glass that will show you what your D7100 is really capable of. I suggest you look at the new Nikon 300mm F4.0 VR lens. It is small and compact (especially for a 300mm), very sharp and will even take at least a 1.4 teleconverter with little to no loss in quality. With a 1.4 teleconverter, this lens will go out to the equivalent of 630mm on your D7100.
Oct 18, 2017 15:32:02 #
Please read up on crop sensors vs. Full frame. When people tell you that a 200mm lens is a 300mm equivalent on a crop sensor camera, they are misleading you.
It's literally a crop out of the center of the photo. You're still getting the same magnification, so you aren't zooming in an extra 50%. It's just that your field of view is different.
If you are shooting something that requires a lot of magnification, then get the proper lens, and forget about "equivalent" It just doesn't work that way.
It's literally a crop out of the center of the photo. You're still getting the same magnification, so you aren't zooming in an extra 50%. It's just that your field of view is different.
If you are shooting something that requires a lot of magnification, then get the proper lens, and forget about "equivalent" It just doesn't work that way.
Oct 18, 2017 15:36:12 #
Oct 18, 2017 15:44:33 #
If you're asking here, you get opinions. There is scientific information that you can search for REAL comparison. That's what I do.
Oct 18, 2017 16:04:11 #
Over the years I have used Tamron and Tokina lenses on Canon and Nikon cameras without any problem. Just have to be careful the lens works for the camera you want. I did have one problems with a Tokina lens. Also companies like Canon and Nikon will warn you that if it is determined that the 3rd party lens you used caused damage to their camera, on warranty or not, they will not repair it for free, but it will cost you the full price of repairs. Does it happen sometimes, but the risk is on you.
Oct 18, 2017 16:07:30 #
P.S. And the lenses for my Canon 5D Mark III and 7D are Tokina 16-28, Tammies 24-70, 70-200, and 150-600. Sold my inferior Canon glass.
Oct 18, 2017 16:42:09 #
bkyser wrote:
Please read up on crop sensors vs. Full frame. Wh... (show quote)
No they are not misleading you; that is exactly what a lens does on a crop sensor. People should know what they are talking about before they put their foot in their mouth in a world wide format.
Oct 18, 2017 17:39:07 #
[quote=bkyser]Please read up on crop sensors vs. Full frame. When people tell you that a 200mm lens is a 300mm equivalent on a crop sensor camera, they are misleading you.
A lot of techinical people and factory people say exactly that. 200 mm on FF = 200 mm AOV, 200 mm on APS-C = 300 mm (Nikon) and 320 mm AOV (Canon)
It's literally a crop out of the center of the photo. (duh - it is called a "crop sensor") You're still getting the same magnification, so you aren't zooming in an extra 50%. It's just that your field of view is different.
My 6 D has a FF 20.2 MP sensor (35.8x23.9 mm) while my 7DII has an APS-C 20.2 MP sensor (22.4x15.0). Yes I can crop the 6D image to the same dimensions, but it will not have the same resolution ( about 12.6 MP) the 7DII image has all of its 20.2 MP in the same area. So the 7DII using the same lens does give me the AOV of the 6D using a longer lens. There are other factors such as light sensitivity due to pixel size but with an image taken in good light at the same distance the 7DII with say a 400 mm lens the image covers the same area (AOV) as the 6D using a 640 mm lens. You can describe it anyway with any terms you want but to most people it is the image that counts.
If you are shooting something that requires a lot of magnification, then get the proper lens, and forget about "equivalent" It just doesn't work that way.
then a lot of people including many of the world's best photographers must be wrong and they are not really getting those results
A lot of techinical people and factory people say exactly that. 200 mm on FF = 200 mm AOV, 200 mm on APS-C = 300 mm (Nikon) and 320 mm AOV (Canon)
It's literally a crop out of the center of the photo. (duh - it is called a "crop sensor") You're still getting the same magnification, so you aren't zooming in an extra 50%. It's just that your field of view is different.
My 6 D has a FF 20.2 MP sensor (35.8x23.9 mm) while my 7DII has an APS-C 20.2 MP sensor (22.4x15.0). Yes I can crop the 6D image to the same dimensions, but it will not have the same resolution ( about 12.6 MP) the 7DII image has all of its 20.2 MP in the same area. So the 7DII using the same lens does give me the AOV of the 6D using a longer lens. There are other factors such as light sensitivity due to pixel size but with an image taken in good light at the same distance the 7DII with say a 400 mm lens the image covers the same area (AOV) as the 6D using a 640 mm lens. You can describe it anyway with any terms you want but to most people it is the image that counts.
If you are shooting something that requires a lot of magnification, then get the proper lens, and forget about "equivalent" It just doesn't work that way.
then a lot of people including many of the world's best photographers must be wrong and they are not really getting those results
Oct 18, 2017 17:45:44 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
[quote=robertjerl]
Your post I am sure is well intended but the OP is a beginner and not quite ready for a graduate level dissertation on cropped sensors. Nice but overkill comes to mind. And yes, for the OP, a 200 mm becomes a 300 mm lens on a cropped sensor, it makes better sense to the OP.
bkyser wrote:
Please read up on crop sensors vs. Full frame. Wh... (show quote)
Your post I am sure is well intended but the OP is a beginner and not quite ready for a graduate level dissertation on cropped sensors. Nice but overkill comes to mind. And yes, for the OP, a 200 mm becomes a 300 mm lens on a cropped sensor, it makes better sense to the OP.
Oct 18, 2017 19:54:53 #
Tamron lenses have came a LONG way over the years, as have Sigma lenses. Have a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 VB lens and use it on on my 7d II and love it, also use a Signa 24-70 and use that on my 5DIII with great results. Have a Canon 70-200 F4 that's my favorite on both bodies. I think Tamron makes fine lenses as does Sigma, Canon and Nikon. Depends on your budget. Go Tamron, you won't be sorry and save a few bucks with great results, just remember it's the person behind the lens that makes the difference...
Oct 18, 2017 20:47:52 #
I may be coming in late on this topic, and I shoot with the Nikon full frame, but I also use a 28-300mm VR (mine happens to be a Nikon lens) and it rarely leaves my camera these days! I also have a 70-200mm F/2.8 VR and I haven't used it since buying the 28-300mm. I just did buy a Tamron 150-600mm G2 lens, and the quality seems superb, so these days the third party lenses have caught up in quality for the most part. I did buy the 28-300mm used, and actually the Tamron mentioned here is the only lens I've bought new, and I have about 10 lenses and they all work wonderfully. Best of luck with whatever choice you make.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.