Tamron 70-300mm F4/5.6 DI LD Macro

J

Joshuashaw

Messages
127
Name
Joshua Shaw
Edit My Images
Yes
This lens RRPs at £200, but when bought with a Nikon it's like £100.

Is this rated a good lens, and it has a wide focal length this mean I can get close up macro shots of subjects from distance? Can anyone interpretate the model into what would make sense to a newbie to DSLR photography, thanks!
 
From my experiance fella, you need to decide what you like to photograph first.

I started photography in Dec 2006, and bought myself a 400D, jumping in at the deep end. I'd never even held a DSLR, and only really looked into them about 3 weeks before I bought mine.

I rushed, as you do being young (I was almost 17), I had money burning a hole my pocket and I saw the Canon 75-300mm telephoto lens, I had a quick look on a few sites and it seemed alright, so I bought it. £170 lighter, I now had a big, long lens in my bag.

In the time i've owned that lens, i've used it 6 times fella.

Now that I understand photography, and the ins/outs of it, I should'nt have bought that lens, I should have spent it on something else ie. a flash, a different lens etc.

If you KNOW what you want to take photos of, by all means fella, knock yourself out. But with me, I love shooting cars, but I've also come to like shooting landscapes & portrait too, but for the stuff I shoot, the 75-300 is far too long, get what i'm saying?

So just have a think on what you'd like to shoot, and see if it will REALLY suit your needs, and what else could replace it for the same kinda money that would help you/suit your shooting better.

Hope this helps dude.
 
I understand where your coming from pal and appreciate your judgement, I think you posted in one of my other topics. But I would definitely enjoy macro on a DSLR, when my Samsung NV10 worked, it has a macro feature which was pretty funky for a digital camera, I liked photographs of insects and anything random that makes macro pretty funky and enjoyable.
 
No danger fella, just thought i'd point it out as i'd made...not a mistake, but you catch my drift.

If you enjoy shooting macro type stuff, go for it. (y)
 
the 70-300 won't be great for macro tbh, most lenses stick a 'macro' on for marketing so will be able to focus a bit closer than your normal telephoto zoom but it wont come close to a true macro lens...
 
Would it be good for action sports this lens, motocross, mountain biking etc? what would it purpose as lens be?
 
I have that lens and it's okay, here's a few shots I've taken with it!

411757429_3b86f6ba3e.jpg


730657456_4c8d17c7b3.jpg


672051446_3e21468503.jpg


2694359118_e8243776f3.jpg


Dave
 
Can anyone shed some light on this lens and what's it uses are as someone said it's not a macro lens? or could someone reccomend me a good macro lens for fit a Nikon, maximum price £100.
 
The cheapest lens macro lens available in stores now is probably a Sigma 50mm F2.8 Macro:
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3252&navigator=5

I can be had cheaper on-line for sure.
That said, 0.5x macro isn't that bad, if you want more magnification, you'll going to need a bit of practice before you manage to get something looking good.

I have a Sigma 70-300 mm APO DG macro and I asked for it over the Tamron because of less reported CA. Sharpness is usually OK too.
 
Thanks CarlukeDave for those photos, I have just bought that lens and looking forward to using it. It should arrive today.
Bill
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top