Lens I never use?

S

spacester

Messages
399
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
A year or so back, my D60 and lenses were stolen. I made an insurance claim, and they paid new for old or replaced the equipment if still available. Unluckily they managed to source a replacement Tamron 70-300, which came as part of the kit I bought when I didn't know I was doing with lenses. Sorry if there are any reading this bread who like that lens, but I findit a pig of a lens - slow and noisy to focus, for example. I think I have used it since I bought my new kit (D5100 with 18-55 kit lens, nikon 35mm 1.8 and 55-200 VR), as even though it has a little bit extra at the long end, I find I don't need that extra reach.

I was talking to a friend a few days ago, also with a Nikon, and asked if he wanted it. He was quite pleased, saying that there is lots he could do with it. Bearing in mind he has a lot more kit than me, with lenses in that focal length already, what is it that he would do with it? What would you do with this pig of a lens?
 
If its a lens you don't use and dont get on with it and your friend wants it I can see your answer all ready. Pass it onto your friend. Not sure what you mean by what he will do with it. If he has a second body he might use it on that and have a shorter range lens on his main camera. Or just ask him what his intentions are.
 
I quite like my Tamron 70-300, I use it for my son's rugby games and have got some great keepers!
 
Creative uses for the lens...
1. Paperweight?
2. Doorstop?
3. Rolling pin?
4. Stand for small pot plant?
5. Put inside sock and use as a cosh?
6. Prop for am-dram society?
7. Use as murder weapon (see 5) to frame you (your prints are all over it)?
 
Turns out he wants to reverse mount a fast wide prime on it for macro work. Tried that myself, hated it! Now I reverse mount a prime directly to the body (or to extension tubes), as I find the results are much better!

So it's on his desk at work, and no longer weighing down my camera bag ;-)
 
I had one of those - hated it. Worst lens I've ever owned. It's only positive was the macro mode (2:1 not true macro) was OK. Supposedly the VC version is a lot better - it needs to be!
 
SixToes said:
I had one of those - hated it. Worst lens I've ever owned. It's only positive was the macro mode (2:1 not true macro) was OK. Supposedly the VC version is a lot better - it needs to be!
Click to expand...

To be honest, it's made me suspicious of all Tamron lenses. Can't believe any decent lens company would make such a thing. The 2:1 macro was ok, but I have much better solution (1:1 through to 1:4) which weighs a lot less!
 
spacester said:
To be honest, it's made me suspicious of all Tamron lenses. Can't believe any decent lens company would make such a thing. The 2:1 macro was ok, but I have much better solution (1:1 through to 1:4) which weighs a lot less!
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. I was thinking about getting the old 17-50 2.8 they made but after owning that 70-300 I pretty much lost interest.
 
spacester said:
To be honest, it's made me suspicious of all Tamron lenses. Can't believe any decent lens company would make such a thing. The 2:1 macro was ok, but I have much better solution (1:1 through to 1:4) which weighs a lot less!
Click to expand...

Every company makes dogs get yourself a canon 75-300 mm among others if you want proof!

Tamron and sigma have really upped their games in recent years and in a few cases are now making better lenses than the oem's
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top