anyone got a tamron 18-270 ?

tomkbucks

tomkbucks

Messages
877
Name
thomas
Edit My Images
Yes
I use as my daily lens a canon 18 - 135 but feel its just an 'ok' lens nothing amazing, as a trade off im tempted to move towards another jack of all trades - the 18-270 tamron to give me more zoom as a walk about lens, am i mad thinking about this ? has anyone got or used a 18-270 tamron ? thanks!
 
I had the original version for a year or so and was pretty pleased with it on a D90 - by all accounts, the new version is a step up. My only reason for selling was that I wanted a faster lens for indoor shooting.

The original can now be found for about £250-300 and is a bargain to my mind.

Take a look at the Flickr pool for this lens to see what it is capable of.
 
thanks , it was a tricky choice as i felt the canon 18-135 gave a better photo - and it prob does BUT im starting to think the 18-270 would most of the time be very similar and give me more to take pictures off,
 
I've no experience of the Canon (for which I daily offer a Deo gratias ;) ) - which is better for you depends on your shooting style and what you like to shoot.
 
thats the problem im a bit of a new user and am lacking in the skill department.. my theory is good i just need lots and lots more practice ! i tend to take places and landscape - for this my 10-20 tends to stay on the camear , but for out and about walking i stick with the 18-135 - just feel the 18-270 gives me more versatility ?
 
Well, it will give more versatility but as you already have the 18-135 ground covered, something like a 70-300 would do a good job too. Obviously it means changing lenses so what is important is having good quality glass. I don't know how the quality of the lens you have compares with that of the Tamron.
 
I have had my one for 18 months and it was my only lens up until recently. It is a very versatile lens and capable of a lot. It is good across its whole 15x focal range but needs good light to get the best out of it, the VC is very good, it is reasonably compact, but it is not the fastest lens in the world to focus but still reasonable. Photos do need an extra tweak of sharpness and saturation in pp to look their best but overall I am very happy with the IQ and our house is full of photos I have taken with it.

At £300 new it is now real bargain. Trade or sell the 18-135 though as there is no point having both. The PDZ or newer version is smaller but when I tried one I did not see any difference in IQ or focus speed and could not really see how they justify the extra £200 cost over the older one.

I have upgraded due to taking photography a lot more seriously and possible work but I would still not hesitate to give it a :thumbs: and unless you want to start spending big money there is little out there to match it. I am still not sure if I will sell mine as I still think it has its uses, as a take it anywhere and do anything sort of lens it is great. An excellent travel light holiday lens or outdoor party or concert, footy matches ECT ECT........
 
humm were can you find it for £300 ? id buy one at that !

i do have a sigma 70-300 but just dont want to chance lenses all the time..
 
I moved from an 18-135 to the Tamron 18-270 PZD a couple of months ago. This on a 550D. Really like it. Great walkabout lens and IQ seems as good as the 18-135 through it's range. The stabilisation is AMAZING - locks on target and getting good shots handheld at the long end is a breeze. And of course it's very nice not to be changing lenses
The only downside I've found is that it struggles to focus at the long end in low light - but that's reasonably expected when it's getting to f/6.3 up there. I think the camera is only rated to focus up to f/5.5.

When I bought it, Amazon had the non-PZD for £330. I paid £500 for the new version. I wasn't sure the focussing speed was worth the difference, but my geeky got-to-have-the-latest-thing head kicked in :).
 
I had the original 18-270 and loved it unfortunately mine developed a focusing fault so it went back and I had a refund but while it was working ok I loved it, as said was so versatile and never off the camera.
On looking to replace it and looking at write ups of the new pdz version against the Sigma 18-250 the Sigma beat it so I went for that.
I have found though that the Tamron seems to have truer colour than the Sigma.
 
Ref. the Tammy 18-270, a student of mine left his 18-270 in his checked-in baggage post photographing at one of the euro-football matches last year and when he opened his bag on arrival back here in the UK it had disintegrated.

You gotta love baggage handlers !

I fancy the FL range of this lens but that experiece put me off a touch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top