Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 73

Thread: Tamron for nikon

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Down the road from Sydney
    Posts
    14,702
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Tamron for nikon

    hello all you avid phtographers out there

    have any of you had any experience with Tamron lenses?

    I can't as much as i would like to afford any of the top end nikkor lenses

    so I have been looking at the

    Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Lens

    Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di Lens

    this is probably the only way i'm going to get something with a 2.8 apperture without having to spend over a grand to get one

    so anyone know anything about these lenses? used them? pro's con's?

    i have heard that tamron use good glass rather than plastics is this true?

    i would like to buy a nice lense before i go up to the north in oct, but have to watch the old budget as i'm also looking into buying a hd camcorder to, to document the whole trip and put it to dvd

    thanks

    dullbird
    Our Land Rover does not leak oil! it just marks its territory.......




  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Shepparton
    Posts
    1,764
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I have a 100 to 400 Tamaron lense on a F4 body and think that it is a very good lense, compact with a good aperature (can not remember) and with no distortion.
    I got my local photo shop to get one in for me to try before buying, and the professional photographer at the shop was very impressed by it and was considering buying a couple of Tamron lenses for himself.
    If the lens are comparitively heavy, then they mostlikely have glass not plastic lens.
    I would buy another tamron lens.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Kyabram, VIC 3620
    Posts
    2,544
    Total Downloaded
    0
    In my days of 'playing at photography' some 20 odd years ago, most of the lenses I used were Tamron - on my Olympus OM 1 and OM 10

    Great little lenses - never had issues with them - and obviously much cheaper than Carl Zeiss or similar


    .....................but as I say that was 20 odd years ago

  4. #4
    dmdigital's Avatar
    dmdigital is offline OldBushie Vendor

    Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Arnhem Land, NT
    Posts
    8,492
    Total Downloaded
    0
    DB, depends on what you want to use it for. Nothing wrong with Tamron lenses (though if you test drive the Nikkor 24-70 you'll see what a really good lens is like - just ignore the price ).

    Depends on what you want to do. 17-50 would be better for landscape and give you the wider angle. 28-75 would be more general purpose. I don't know either lens and haven't used them. My main lens is a 24-70 f/2.8 Nikkor and it would be on my camera most of the time. That said I'll swap down or up as needed. Have a look on some of the DSLR forums.

    Which Nikon DSLR do you have?
    MY15 Discovery 4 SE SDV6

    Past: 97 D1 Tdi, 03 D2a Td5, 08 Kimberley Kamper, 08 Defender 110 TDCi, 99 Defender 110 300Tdi[/SIZE]

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    St Helena,Melbourne
    Posts
    16,769
    Total Downloaded
    1.13 MB
    If i wasnt using canon lenses with my Canon 30D i would use either a tamron or sigma lens, very good value and quality optics and as you said the only way you can afford a lens of that aperture without having to sell a landy to pay for it.
    MY08 TDV6 SE D3- permagrin ooh yeah
    2004 Jayco Freedom tin tent
    1998 Triumph Daytona T595
    1974 VW Kombi bus
    1958 Holden FC special sedan

  6. #6
    dmdigital's Avatar
    dmdigital is offline OldBushie Vendor

    Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Arnhem Land, NT
    Posts
    8,492
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by loanrangie View Post
    If i wasnt using canon lenses with my Canon 30D i would use either a tamron or sigma lens, very good value and quality optics and as you said the only way you can afford a lens of that aperture without having to sell a landy to pay for it.
    Don't know which is worse Canon owners or Toyota drivers

    Sorry couldn't help that one!


    DB, check out Nikonians :: The Nikon User Community and NikonCafe.com
    MY15 Discovery 4 SE SDV6

    Past: 97 D1 Tdi, 03 D2a Td5, 08 Kimberley Kamper, 08 Defender 110 TDCi, 99 Defender 110 300Tdi[/SIZE]

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    St Helena,Melbourne
    Posts
    16,769
    Total Downloaded
    1.13 MB
    Quote Originally Posted by dm_td5 View Post
    Don't know which is worse Canon owners or Toyota drivers

    Sorry couldn't help that one!


    DB, check out Nikonians :: The Nikon User Community and NikonCafe.com
    HaHa, quite true, i bought my first SLR in 1991 just before i went on an African safari for 6 months and now on my 5th and wont buy anything else. Not that i dont like Nikons but i have had a good run and there is no point changing when i already have lenses and a metz to with them.
    MY08 TDV6 SE D3- permagrin ooh yeah
    2004 Jayco Freedom tin tent
    1998 Triumph Daytona T595
    1974 VW Kombi bus
    1958 Holden FC special sedan

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Down the road from Sydney
    Posts
    14,702
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dm_td5 View Post
    DB, depends on what you want to use it for. Nothing wrong with Tamron lenses (though if you test drive the Nikkor 24-70 you'll see what a really good lens is like - just ignore the price ).

    Depends on what you want to do. 17-50 would be better for landscape and give you the wider angle. 28-75 would be more general purpose. I don't know either lens and haven't used them. My main lens is a 24-70 f/2.8 Nikkor and it would be on my camera most of the time. That said I'll swap down or up as needed. Have a look on some of the DSLR forums.

    Which Nikon DSLR do you have?
    i have a D80

    with a 18-50, 55-200 and a 70-300........with the off roading i tend to use the 18-50 more as i just cant get far enough away with the 55-200

    but all these lenses are up in the 5's aperture range.......

    dont get me wrong these lenses are great and have created some wonderful pics, and at my course most of the comments i get are about the great colour that i get!
    you know what its like though you just got to have that little bit more

    so would like to get some lenses in the 2.8 range

    interesting about the sigma loanrangie, personally from what i have read i wouldn't touch them you got any pics that you have taken with the lenses just be good to see what you get off them
    Our Land Rover does not leak oil! it just marks its territory.......




  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    NSW far north coast
    Posts
    17,285
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Doesn't anyone use primes anymore.....

    I went electronic with my last body, it sports aperture priority.....

    Yes, my bodies and lenses are nearly as old as me

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,132
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ladas View Post
    In my days of 'playing at photography' some 20 odd years ago, most of the lenses I used were Tamron - on my Olympus OM 1 and OM 10

    Great little lenses - never had issues with them - and obviously much cheaper than Carl Zeiss or similar


    .....................but as I say that was 20 odd years ago
    Zacary same here

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!