Tamron 18-270mm f3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD

F

fatboy1000

Messages
35
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

After a few years break from photography I've decided that now that I can afford it, I'm going to start again. I used to have a Canon Eos film camera, so went with the 550d as I'll be more used to it, and have done about a month's worth of solid reading of reviews - apparently it's quite good...

Intro over, I am looking for some help. I'm off to Borneo, Singapore and Kuala Lumpur on my honeymoon in April, and am thinking about lenses. There will be plenty of buildings, scenery, and monkeys to photograph, so a variety would seem sensible. On the other hand, i don't want to carry too much. I already have the 18-55mm IS kit lens and the 50mm F1.8, so it's a question of whether i go for something like the 55-250mm IS and that's it, or give the 18-55mm to the other half (she has a 1000d and the slightly rubbish non-IS 18-55mm) and get something like the Canon 18-200mm, sigma 18-250, or Tamron 18-270. In reviews on dpreview.com, the Tamron came out top (for what I'm looking for), but had a rubbish AF. However, they've just released the PZD version, which is meant to be like Canon's USM, which, according to the Tamron bumpf, fixes this. Which is a really long way of asking if anybody has any experience of this lens? Any thoughts would be much appreciated (for what it's worth, I am aware of the sacrifice in IQ of superzooms, and am slightly undecided whether it's worth it).

Many thanks
Mark.
 
Hi and welcome to the forum.

I've previously owned the Canon 55-250 IS and the Tamron 18-270 VC.
As far as budget lenses go, I was happy enough with both of them and yes, 18-270 VC can be a little slow with AF but nothing significant to worry about imho.
The Tamron is a good lens for general walkabout when on a budget I bought it to replace the Canon and to save me swapping lenses on that cruise and it served me well.
I've moved on since then but I would still argue for anyone on a budget it's not a bad lens.


These were taken with the Tamron: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hashcaked/sets/72157615370468652/

Taken with the Canon http://www.flickr.com/photos/hashcaked/2927115609/in/set-72157607893551371/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hashcaked/2927120605/in/set-72157607893551371/

Have a look at the exif data if you want to know more.
 
Thanks Hashcake/Darren/Daz. Those photos you took with the Tamron of the birds mid-flight would seem to suggest that the autofocus isn't really that much of an issue (although granted these were taken in bright daylight - I imagine darkness would be a different matter - really great photos btw). That probably suggests that it's not worth paying an extra £150 for the PZD.

Now I just need to decide whether to go single or dual lens solution for the range...
 
fatboy1000 said:
Thanks Hashcake/Darren/Daz. Those photos you took with the Tamron of the birds mid-flight would seem to suggest that the autofocus isn't really that much of an issue (although granted these were taken in bright daylight - I imagine darkness would be a different matter - really great photos btw). That probably suggests that it's not worth paying an extra £150 for the PZD.

Now I just need to decide whether to go single or dual lens solution for the range...
Click to expand...

That's the thing, given decent light you can keep the ISO down and don't have to ramp up the exposure levels.
You will be going to places that should offer decent light during the day so you will probably be fine.
If you plan to to shoot indoors, although it's not as good as a flash gun, the onboard flash will get you by.
 
Hi Snipet

Thanks for the suggestion. Given that I've got the cropped sensor though, I think 28mm is probably too long for the widest angle. Unless, of course, i get the Canon 10-22mm... Sadly, I think the two combined are out of my budget :'(

How did you find the AF on that though? Was it quick, average, or slow?

Thanks.
 
Im finding it fairly quick. Not the fastest but definatly quick enough for anything ive taken pictures of as ive had not one problem with it.
 
I used to live in malaysia for 15 years, island of Penang.
I noticed you said you were going to borneo, the jungles even on a sunny day can be so dense that it blocks alot of the sunlight, whether the the tamron would struggle i have no idea, but something to think about... I've heard good news about the sigma 70 - 200 2.8.. perhaps a tokina 12 - 24 f4 for the city and sigma 24 - 70 2.8 and a 70 - 200 2.8 for walkabout and birdie photo's?

it's a little on the pricey side but hell of alot cheaper than the canon L range.
 
That is getting kind of pricey, and also ideally I wanted a lens that'll stay on the camera (fearful of dust which played havoc with my EOS 300 back in the day). Good point about dense foliage though - that might persuade me to go with the quicker/more accurate focussing PZD version of the Tamron. Or possibly the better Canon 18-200mm, and crop if needed back home.

Or possibly 3 lenses like you suggest...!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top