|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on October 21, 2022 Pros: Great first telephoto lens, crazy stabilization Cons: AF not lightning, loses a little over 200mm but it is there. Opinion: This is the telephoto lens that comes to mind when they ask me "which first telephoto lens do you recommend?" Here, this is the easiest to use. Not in a negative sense. It has a scary stabilization for the price it has. I took it many years ago at 300 euros but today it is also used at 150 euros, what do you want to say? Autofocus is honest. It is a fairly fast and accurate ultrasonic USD on stationary subjects, on moving subjects it is not a Canon L-series lens USM. And what did you expect? It costs a tenth! Of course, but it is good to reiterate it. Let's say that qualitatively up to 200mm it holds a very good blow, comparable to the 70-200 f / 4 L IS I Canon, from 200 to 250mm it becomes sufficient, beyond it becomes mediocre. For those who love the 70-300 range its competitor is the 70-300 L which has better performance but weighs more and used is 500 euros. |
  | sent on February 08, 2022 Pros: Stabilized, focal range, price Cons: Sharpness at 300mm not excellent Opinion: Taken used to replace an earlier Tamron 70-300 (not stabilized). They are two completely different worlds since with the previous lens to pull out a decent photo you had to be lucky. With the stabilized version the opinion is positive, the color rendering and the overall quality is satisfactory even if from 250 mm you lose the detail (but there can be and in any case nothing dramatic). The construction of the lens is good, as is the petal hood as well. Being a pushed canvas obviously it is bulky, although not excessively heavy, but after all finding similar lenses with reduced dimensions and dimensions is impossible. Very responsive autofocus (detail not obvious). Recommended for the excellent quality-price as well as for the availability in the world of second-hand. |
| sent on February 02, 2022 Pros: Stabilizer and autofocus, lightness, general sharpness, 300mm, price Cons: No focal excursion lock, no focus limiter, no constant f4 Opinion: Honest and very good alternative to the various 70-200 f2.8 or f4 Nikon or Tamron, and offers 300mm. Valid for general use from macro / close up, landscape, portrait and nature photography; it immediately shows its limits because at 300mm you remain short for most of the naturalistic / sport, but for simple action and motor sports or landscape details it does its job very well. Uncomfortable because it has no focal excursion blockage and therefore expands completely when hung around the neck. Its strong point is not so much the AF - which works well - as the very effective VR and allows great flexibility in freehand use at 200/300mm. It solves on average very well, even if at 300mm it appears slightly softer, but this is also common to some 400/500mm lenses. It competes with Nikon 70-200 f4 even if the latter has some extra gear; the only alternatives to 300mm are only fixed lenses such as Nikon 300mm f2.8, Nikon 300mm f4 af-d or af-s, Nikon 300mm f4 pf with their pros and cons, but certainly duplicable without large losses while the 70-300 does not. |
 | sent on October 28, 2021 Pros: Excellent sharpness especially between f8 / f11, excellent stabilization, AF speed, excellent quality / price ratio. Cons: For the purchase price none. Opinion: Purchased used for about 200 euros but practically equal to the new, I use it on my D7200 for still life (professional photos in the studio with excellent results) and for birdlife (without too many pretensions). If you want you can also venture some portraits, if the light allows it. It behaves very well already at full opening, does not vignette and distorts very little. Chromatic aberrations are almost nil. After 200mm it is the best of itself from f8 onwards. My specimen has the zoom ring not very fluid, but also other friends behave in about the same way. The AF ring, on the other hand, is very fluid, the distance scale is convenient and the possibility of being able to use the manual focus at any time, even with the selector set to AF. No back or front focus issues encountered. Of this lens is appreciated not only the sharpness, but also the excellent stabilization and a surprisingly silent, fast and precise AF considering the amateur use for which it is intended. It holds up very well the dense sensor of my D7200, for the price paid is worth 10/10. |
 | sent on October 13, 2021 Pros: sharpness, price, stabilization Cons: for what it costs no one Opinion: Here, too, the number of reviews of this lens speaks for itself. It is great for value for money. I do not repeat myself on the Pros, they are those, I just wanted to add that I had the opportunity to "compare" it with my ex 70 200 2.8 vr2 (finally sold in exchange for this Tamron for a matter exclusively of weight and bulk on the occasion of a trip): The Nikon is Nikon, on the aperture, on the general build quality and on the contrast of the image (prices necessarily very different also), but I must say that the Tamron in terms of sharpness behaves really well in the focal lengths in common. After 200mm it begins to lose slightly in quality, but it can stay there and it's fine like that. Take a used one because it's worth it, I recommend it. |
 | sent on June 11, 2021 Pros: stabilizer, color rendering, focus. Cons: for me none Opinion: The feeling that da is solid, but should not be scrambled, not being tropicalized. Rarely is a shot wrong in focus and it can happen due to poor light or mis-approach to using af in my opinion. I also use it for portraits (85mmf4) and I must say that to my taste the detail is really great and the blurry pleasant and creamy (not having a very bright opening is an effect that must be found and with FF it is certainly easier to achieve). After 200 millimeters they all say there's a drop, but that drop after 200 mm in my opinion is infinite. In my opinion, if you do not need a telescope for observing small birds at high distances or sporting footage from great distances or with the pretense of blurring in infinity and the like, you can do anything. |
 | sent on April 21, 2021 Pros: Price and stabilizer, stabilizer and price. price. stabilizer. Cons: Talking about defects, considering the ratio/quality price, means wanting to look for the hair in the egg. Opinion: I press to be a simple photoamer who photographs for himself and for the pleasure of hearing "click" after each shot. I use it on Nikon D5600 (APS-C) and have a great time. I do not dwell on repeating the well-known (and a few) small ones that many have already emphasized (I call them in because "defects", given the price, seems excessive to me); I would like to say a few words, however, about the stabilizer: it seems to see a still image in the crosshairs! At 300mm I was able to achieve more than acceptable results even with a time of 1/30. |
 | sent on April 16, 2021 Pros: Stabilizer, autofocus, price Cons: Weight, some difficulty with little light Opinion: I have been using it for a long time especially for aeronautical spotting, given the price has given me several satisfactions with excellent shots. In poor light it is a bit difficult but I would say that it fully meets my needs. great purchase that definitely paid off. It loses a little sharpness above 250mm. |
 | sent on April 07, 2021 Pros: Value for money, Stabilizer and Price Cons: Weight, sharpness that drops over 200mm Opinion: This lens has accompanied me for 5 years on my former 650D and as far as it costs I can say that it is a really good lens in value for money, obviously if you start comparing to canon L series optics or superior optics of other brands, then the difference is there and you see. Personally I used it in day and night landscaping and also for my son's football matches and he never missed a beat, despite the slowness of the 650D, the rows always workable and sharp up to 200/220mm, as well as then you lose quality. Note TOP is the stabilizer that is phenomenal really, guarantees what is written, 3/4 stop definitely, otherwise good yield as mentioned, also the typical colors of the tamron lenses and also the speed, stabilizer apart from that when it is active takes a few seconds to start. I sold it only and exclusively for the 70-200 f/4 canon. |
 | sent on March 18, 2021 Pros: Unsurpassed value for money, I took it with five years warranty Italy Cons: Sharpness drop above 200 but even at 300 you bring home the photo Opinion: I needed a zoom for my photos outside, then I found myself using it for portraits with the help of an easel, but weight is not a problem for me up to 200/220 is a razor with a pleasant soft blur, stabilizer that does its duty,the most beautiful sunsets at Trasimeno I made with this lens, the colors are pleasant,I would buy it back?si. |
 | sent on March 07, 2021 Pros: General yield, stabilizer, solidity of the lampshed Cons: Slightly heavy, but I'm not the first to say it Opinion: Taken from a few days to really "two coffees" with two years warranty. Actually I also have the 70-200 f4L, but given the price and the 100mm more I decided to buy it. I used it a few hours on my 6D2, but if good morning you see from the morning... It's a heavy hair, but it's that weight that you think about quality despite the optics not being made of metal, and I still prefer "massive" optics because they manage in my opinion to better balance weights. The stabilizer is embarrassing, in a positive sense, of course. The image literally nails in the crosshairs and you can shoot at unthinkable times. With the 6D2 sensor the sharpness of this 70-300 is excellent up to about 220mm, as well as starting to expire slightly. All this with diaphragms quite closed. It has a chromatic character of its own that may or may not please, I love it, but they are tastes clearly. It's a dark lens, it's true, but in my opinion it's c**o to so many original analogues. For what it costs today it is definitely a "must have". Money spent really well |
 | sent on February 24, 2021 Pros: Stabilizer, price, general yield. Cons: Maybe the weight but it's a well-known feature Opinion: I recently bought this lens to replace the Nikon AF-s 70-300 VR that had fallen to me and it was not appropriate to repair it. Paid 180 € with 1 year warranty in excellent general condition. Used with the D5200 and D5300 the yield is at least equal to nikon, and exceeds it at 300mm and up close, although it is not a macro. Blurry pleasant for the 9 slats of the diaphragm, fairly neutral colors, but this also depends on the pictures control applied. At the moment I am definitely satisfied with the vr performance as well. I recommend it to those who do not want to commit too economically and also want to travel "light". |
| sent on September 14, 2020 Pros: Scary stabilizer, unbeatable price, focal, quality on FF, robustness, fast AF Cons: Sharpness on dense APSC sensors, sharpness after 200mm Opinion: Extra-famous lens that gives me discreet satisfactions. Robust, reliable AF that doesn't miss a beat, at this price it's hard to find better. If you want brightness and sharpness at all focal points the figures to spend (and the weight to carry with you) are something else. Mount it on FF and you won't regret it. Honorable mention to the stabilizer who does incredible work! |
 | sent on July 03, 2020 Pros: Autofocus - Price - Q/P Stabilizer Cons: Weight (perhaps) Opinion: I have not made so many shots and above all I have not yet used it on my personal battlefield (in F.1 circuit mainly) to give an all-round judgment. Anyway I wanted to make an upgrade to my Nikon d7500 compared to the previous material, and I found a good compromise with this Tamron without having to faint, having not only the photo as Hobby. The stabilizer struck me positively in the first place, but also the focus I found it reactive, at least compared to my past as a photo amateur. With a machine-like machine gun in the D7500, I needed a little object like that... waiting for more in-depth analysis, for now satisfied. Only downside is probably the weight that could on an internal day of shooting annoy, but I resumed in the gym with the weights... |
 | sent on June 07, 2020 Pros: Price, sharpness, stabilization, F4 at 70mm Cons: autofocus, sharpness after 200mm Opinion: Used to the days when I was a photographer by profession, working with high-level optics, I expected a mediocre 70-300 amateur. None of this, in relation to price is a really impressive goal, both on APS-C and on FF. In the range 70-200 is very sharp, even at TA, but closing by a couple of stops the result improves not a little, even on very dense sensors like that of the D800. The sharpness at the edges is good on FF, but not excellent (we're talking about a supertele from 350 degrees ...). Closing in on F8-F9 gives you great results. From 200 to 250mm is good, over 250mm is soft. It is more massive than the typical FF 70-300, but this is also justified by that 70mm half stop (F/4.0 instead of F/4.5) that can come in handy. The bokeh is very pleasant (thanks also to the 9-bladed diaphragm), which makes it a suitable lens for portraits too, a good compromise in the absence of a bright fixed. The focus is precise and the speed is good in optimal conditions (both contrast and brightness), but in terms of yield it is inferior to both Nikon and Canon counterparts, and is obviously unparalleled to the latest generation engines (such as Nikon's AF-P lightning). The stabilization, despite being old-generation (so noisy and a little slow in "hooking"), is remarkable in terms of compensation (3-4 stops). The build quality is good and gives a fairly robust feeling (although it is made of plastic), the MAF ring is precise, but the fluidity of the zoom ring is not the best (typical of plastic supertele). Mount 62mm filters. In conclusion, an unbeatable lens as value for money, not without flaws and limits (also dictated by age), but still able to give satisfaction. |
 | sent on May 05, 2020 Pros: Construction, weight, sharpness, fast maf, quality/price Cons: nothing to highlight, considering the price Opinion: Essential premise: I use this optics on a sony a57, and my review depends on the experience that this canvas I drew from my body machine. I have read several negative comments about an alleged excessive weight and, honestly, all this makes me smile. We're talking about a telephoto lens, a 70-300, you can't expect a pocket optics. My very personal impression, in using this lens, is to have in my hands a durable optics, well built, decisive and pleasant (even by virtue of the weight itself, absolutely not excessive). The sharpness is great. The lens is quick to focus, and this can make all the difference in most of the scenarios you encounter when using a canvas. What should not be underestimated is the compatibility of the same with sensors both Apsc and FF: this allows those in possession of Apsc machines, like me, to be able to switch to FF in the future without necessarily abandoning this optics; you can use a specific adapter if necessary. Recommended. Considering the price my rating is 9/10. |
 | sent on May 01, 2020 Pros: Cost Cons: Af. Weight Opinion: For the price a good goal, but honestly I thought it had a more responsive Auto Focus. If you have to follow subjects in rapid approach I noticed that it focuses quite well at the first "hit", but it struggles to replenish, this in my opinion that I am not an experienced photo amateur. Then maybe and pair it with my 70D that creates this. |
 | sent on April 18, 2020 Pros: cost, fast AF (not very fast), excellent stabilizer Cons: Construction a little light, slight sharpening to 300mm Opinion: This zoom was the first optics I bought after the lens kit of my old Canon Entry Level and I still own it, and I'm quite happy with it. Why? For the really effective stabilizer, the USD focus is fine, it's not mind-blowing, but it's honest, you can also make sports shots without major problems. It has a slight drop in sharpness to 300mm but, in my case not a painful thing, still solvable in part closing by 2/3 or 1 diaphragm stop. I've been thinking for a long time that I'll change it to the 70-200 f4 is and multiplier 1.4, but I would definitely lose it in size, affecting the fact that I can keep it in the backpack almost always. I've heard that it's a bit of a vacuum cleaner, but I haven't encountered this problem, despite having used it several times on motocross tracks in the summer you don't notice any dust inside or in the photos. For me, if you're looking for a zoom a little unpretentious handyman from Canon L series goes well |
| sent on December 02, 2019 Pros: excellent stabilizer once it hooks the image does not leave it Cons: focus not very fast and noisy Opinion: overall for the price compared to the nikon 70-300 beats it 2-0 sin only for the autofocus a little too noisy, I tried them both and I chose the tamron, I did not regret it, on Saturday I went out to do trkking and I made great photos with excellent results of sharpz Za.. it's not as heavy as they say, if you have support for the backpack reflex it's also comfortable to carry |
 | sent on October 19, 2019 Pros: Very sharp to all focal points, precise AF Cons: No one and not having ihaved it before! Opinion: The lens is excellently crafted, on par with the Nikon equivalents. If of thermoplastic material, it does not make species in the manegeability and solidity. On the other hand, if it were made of metal, its weight would be greatly affected. At the end of the day having a 70-300 weighing only 765g in your hands is a considerable advantage, it does not disturb freehand photography. The stabilizer is great in any situation to the point of giving up the tripod. The sharpness is in the norm, comparable to the most embattled of the usual top brands. To have the same image quality with a Nikon lens you have to spend 3-4 times more, so I would say the value for money is great. It is worth choosing as a viable alternative. At the end of the day, what you pay for in more than a top brand-name lens is the brand and the advertising that comes with it, not the quality. |
 | sent on September 01, 2019 Pros: Sharpness up 200mm, new and used price, stabilizer, precise AF Cons: noisy, weight, lampshade too bulky Opinion: I tested this tamron on 550D and M50 for both portraits and birdlife, bought new low price good sharpness up to 200mm, very good bokeh in portraits. AF quite accurate. Unfortunately the lens is quite heavy which pushes to leave it at home very often if not certain of its use, it also helps the lampshade that is very bulky and that if mounted in reverse, makes it impossible to use the lens with access to the dial. The stabilizer works well but is very noisy. Good for quality/price and to start with the canvases, but to date, at its price from new or little more are found on the used L canon series, I would probably orient myself on them sacrificing the stabilizer but having the certainty of quality. |
 | sent on August 14, 2019 Pros: Sharpness, price, focus, stabilizer to be scary Cons: Portraits a little difficult in the late afternoon, heavy Opinion: This Tamron is my first Tele, I consider myself very satisfied with my purchase since I can use it for both 70mm portraits and for photos of details at higher distance, it has a really impressive sharpness for what it costs and I would recommend it to any start of photography... It is inconvenient to use the lens with the paralight mounted in reverse but above all he noticed a trend of colors to red when I go to shoot in situations of little light. |
 | sent on March 10, 2019 Pros: Sharpness in general, derisory price, impressive stabilizer Cons: Photo a bit "flat", autofocus not very fast Opinion: I used it/am using it a lot, it is stellar value for money since I found it new on Amazon for less than 300€. Good construction. It has an IMPRESSIVE stabilizer that allows you to get very still shots freehand even at 1/40 of a second at 300 mm: it almost looks like the camera stops in mid-air! Very sharp from f/7.1 down, sharp even to f/4, not to cut your eyes but what do you expect? Towards 300mm it softens a little, but just a derisory amount (at least in my case): I have always managed to get very satisfying shots at 300mm. The photos are a bit flat because the lens doesn't have a good microcontrasto, so the sense of depth/three-dimensionality is hard to achieve. Finally, autofocus is not the fastest and often "hunts", that is, it gets lost and begins to go back and forth looking for the right point. But it's all details, for a price so you put up with this and more! |
 | sent on February 02, 2019 Pros: Cost of the used, seemingly solid construction Cons: I associate myself with those who affirm the decline in definition after the 250 mm focal Opinion: I expected better. I certainly still have little or no experience with this lens, but having compared it with my old Nikkor 300 Ai s ED, it shows a disappointing definition. But I bought it for the practicality and the stabilizer, as well as for the autofocus, and on that I do not discuss. I will use the Nikkor 300 when I can afford the use of the tripod. |
 | sent on January 09, 2019 Pros: Exceptional stabilizer, excellent optical rendering at almost all focal lengths, fast and accurate autofocus, great value for money. Cons: Sharpness not excellent at 300mm Opinion: I think this is the best value for money zoom ever. It has a really high performance stabilizer, an optical rendering and really good sharpness (except at 300mm and at full aperture), the autofocus is fast, precise and silent. Anyone who wants to enter the world of zoom should not get away this goal, much better than the version from 100 and a few euros (does its duty eh, but the difference is abysmal). I really struggled to find flaws in this lens, except the already mentioned softness at the extreme focal lengths. Definitely recommended, it is one of the first lenses that you have to buy to enlarge your outfit. |
 | sent on January 02, 2019 Pros: Excellent value for money, sharpness (loses something just at 300mm, but at F/8-F/10 still good returns), versatility, excellent stabilizer Cons: Hard to use it with hood mounted on the contrary (it's a cons?!), autofocus a little slow (with moving subjects, especially if small, it takes luck!) Opinion: Purchased used in excellent condition at a very advantageous price as upgrade of the old Canon 100-300 USM (not is), compared to which is another planet. Images much sharper and contrastate, good brightness, excellent stabilizer (I have fairly firm hand, but I managed to shoot at 300mm to 1/30 without any blur, with the old Canon I dreamed of it!). Already good to TA, it improves further by closing a little the diaphragm (the best at F/10). AF slow with small subjects, even in light conditions not exaggeratedly critical I happened to "lose" a shot because it did not focus on time the subject in rapid passage (avifauna especially), but being an amateur, was not then this great problem ( With larger and/or slower subjects, no problem). Obvious that a Canon 100-400 II is further another planet, but compared to spending, I am fully satisfied with the purchase and I recommend it to everyone. For the price to which it is used, I think it is difficult to find better. Good Tamron! |
 | sent on December 28, 2018 Pros: Cost, weight, footprint, Diametero filters Cons: A little soft over 250 mm Opinion: I read quite questionable opinions. It will be 8/10 years that I use the lens in question and I consider it one of the best lenses in relation to cost/performance. How do you say it is cumbersome.... heavy and/or missing bracket? Boh is a 70/300.... compact and lightweight lens. Long Lens hood (but Xche is a flaw?!) and Af fast. Lens that I carry always behind very often in place of the 70/200 2.8 that many times it is too short and since I do landscape those 100 mm more serve as well (which does not exploit the 2.8 instead) I recommend the minimum use to f 8-9 x increase the sharpness OT Very slow..... buy it! Very curious to try the 100/400 always Tamron but definitely will anke this a great lens |
 | sent on November 22, 2018 Pros: It seems to me great value for money. Cons: Maybe the weight? Construction? Opinion: I have a Nikon D5100 camera (previously I had Canon 5d and Ob. EF 70-300 USM IS very good) I would buy the Tamron. Looking at the images posted seems to me to be very good value for money. Many write leaking to 300 mm well! If the leak is the one I see is a very good lens among other ultrasonic and stabilized F/4-5.6! For the crop on APS-C I would have more focal length, maybe all in all better.. I accept advice. Thank you. |
 | sent on October 13, 2018 Pros: Excellent value for money, effective stabilization, good build quality always in relation to the price. Cons: Over the 200 mm decreases the definition. Opinion: The success of this optics is closely linked to the purchase price. In Casa Canon There are qualitatively superior solutions but you have to be available to spend more. The Canon offer is still interesting and, in my personal opinion, is to be preferred. That said, I love the wide angles and fixed focal lengths and I use it sporadical, I have not applied my theory and I bought it new to less than three hundred euros. The money is worth them all and knowing the limits you learn to minimize the flaws. The rest has already been widely said. |
 | sent on October 13, 2018 Pros: stabilizer, focus, Price Cons: Sharpness to TA, jar effect Opinion: I kept this lens in outfit for a winter for photos to Wildlife. I found a very good and accurate stabilizer even if the battery of the machine suffers slightly. Not too large even if the lens hood is long enough. Zoom ring almost unusable with hood mounted on the contrary while the ring of the MAF always at Hand. I cannot give opinions for portraiture as it is not a field I know sufficiently to give a reliable opinion. The low price, especially of the used one that is easily found, makes this tele a lens absolutely to try. |
  | sent on September 25, 2018 Pros: Price, compactness, sharpness in general, incredible stabilizer. Cons: For me, in relation to the purchase price, no one. If you claim sharpness from the series L better not to get too many illusions. Opinion: Exceptional lens. If you want compactness and an extended focal range you need to turn to a zoom lens, if you also want it economical I think this Tamron represents a best Buy in its market range. Paid 250 euros on Amazon, new and under warranty for 5 years (only for the first buyer) has served me faithfully for two and a half years, finding space in the camera bag without major problems and not giving particularly in the eye when mounted. The construction is good, though not at the level of a Canon L-series, and by a feeling of robustness. Used on Canon 450d, 5d and 6d I found a big difference in yield between APS-C and FF; On the reduced size for me the quality was not satisfying while on FF the image quality for me was more than good at all focal lengths. It must be said, however, that the 450d is quite old and with a sensor not really the best, needs high-level optics to show the best. The stabilizer is amazing, I came to shoot at 1/15 to 300 mm on FF, getting still images. Personally I took for years without worrying about the exposure time, always still images. Much better than the 24-105 I've owned. Personally I could see that after the 200mm there is no loss of sharpness, rather a small micro-contrast that is perceived as a slight kneading of the image. For me, however, nothing dramatic, in fact, I used it quietly at all focal lengths and at every aperture. But I do not recommend the crop, you lose much detail as the optics can not solve enough. I recommend the purchase, especially if you look for compactness, provided you do not expect extreme sharpness and crop strong. How Tele Handyman Travel in my opinion is perfect. |
 | sent on August 22, 2018 Pros: Focus, construction, focal hike, stabilizer Cons: Loses a lot from 200 mm onwards, heavy, bulky Opinion: I was looking for a good telephoto lens that cost relatively little and in the end I chose him, the Canon 55-250 STM does not convince with the plastic attack even if the rest is defending well, the Canon 70-300 is quite criticized and costs even more so I went on the safe. The lens looks good, solid construction, including Lens hood and 10 year warranty. Mounted on the machine is exaggerated (I have a Canon 1200d), the weight is as much and unbalanced completely forward (in this aspect much better than the 55-250 STM); The focus ring is beautiful at sight and very fluid, can turn even if set to AF, you can not say the same as the zoom ring that is not very fluid and its hardness varies according to the inclination of the lens. The stabilizer does its job very well, trems a bit at the focal points more pushed but the result for what it costs is more than good, not good for videos because it tends to "autocentrarsi" and the end result is not fluid. Too bad for the lens hood that is very narrow and long and put and remove the cap to the lens is a feat for those who have a little big hands. Speaking instead of image quality is love and hatred, between the 70 and 200 mm about the result is very satisfactory (at 70 mm I would say excellent, are beautiful portraits even at full aperture) even if it is advisable to close a bit the diaphragm (7.1) to have a better result , from 200 to 300 Cala quickly, better to stay at least F8 but at that point it is necessary to increase the ISO for not having moved, in short, better to approach if possible and use shorter focal if you want to have good sharpness. I recommend it without a doubt in this price range is not rivals (after you get directly to the Canon 70-200 L) Even if it is worth evaluating the Canon 55-250 STM that costs a lot less (I saw it again at 170-180 euros) since the 300 mm are little exploitable. |
 | sent on August 16, 2018 Pros: Price, AF, weight, stabilization, full-time MF Cons: Sharpness dropping in the last 50mm, no tripod ring Opinion: Objective with a great value for money: the autofocus (as it is ultrasonic) is very fast and the stabilization is excellent, even at the longest focal lengths. Wanting to find some flaw, the zoom ring is a bit ' wide compared to the barrel and easily grains of dust fits into the slot, and it is to hope that they do not enter between the lenses, which has never happened to me. With full excursion and all opening Cala (not too appreciably) in sharpness, but it is still perfectly usable. Wanting to put the dots on the I sometimes feels the lack of a tripod ring (although there are models that, not too good, they cover, but covering the window of focus distance), but for this price is to be expected. I would recommend it to anyone who wants to approach photographic hunting or sports photography (or even macro, as you can see from my galleries) and wants to have for a price content a valid goal, which is not to be changed after two months because unsatisfactory. |
 | sent on July 25, 2018 Pros: Price, stabilizer, focus speed, touch sensation (good rubber on focus and zoom compared to other crap on the market to this figure), weight content Cons: You can find the presence of dust in the lens very quickly (whether you buy it again, and even before used), maximum sharpness of the lense to F/8-9, bulky to 300mm Opinion: It is almost a year that I own this lens, has always been useful to photograph nature (animals), landscapes, macros, etc.... but what struck me right away was its stabilizer, the VC (vibration compensator), very useful in light situations Poor (even when shooting at 1/40 of a second... well.... in those moments you must also have a minimum of steady hand). We then find the USD (ultrasonic focus) very fast for the figure to which this "jewel at low price" is hovering. The only real hassle, as you can read at the beginning is the dust... Before buying the lens I had heard phrases like: |
 | sent on July 16, 2018 Pros: Price, very efficient stabilizer, sharpness (if used at the aperture recommended for focal) Cons: For its nothing price Opinion: It is now available in the second-hand market at around €200 and in the new to €340. Taken from about a month and tested properly on Nikon D7000 with excellent satisfaction due to the ISO tightness of the machine. The stabilizer is exceptional, allowing you to safely recover 3-4 stops. For my use, mainly sports photographs of soccer and some evidence in birdlife, I consider myself very satisfied although in birdlife the optics are obviously a bit ' short forcing a crop of the image obviously already budgeted. In the future I will evaluate whether to continue with the crop or to match it with the Kenko 1.4 or 2x multiplier |
 | sent on June 01, 2018 Pros: Weight-price/quality-sharpness-stabilizer Cons: Lens hood Opinion: One of my favorite lenses, despite having his older brother the 70-200 G2. I use it often and willingly, the stabilization is crazy, you can shoot at 1/60 at 300mm without choppy, also guaranteed by the fact that it is very light and portable. The only drawback in my opinion is the lens hood, which forces you to disassemble it as often as you have to use the lens. Found used at 230 euros, I think one of the best buys. |
 | sent on May 26, 2018 Pros: Value for money Light. Most sharpness sufficed. Very efficient stabilization. Cons: For 300 euros I do not have the courage to find Opinion: Premise the yield is better and not little with the FF and especially with the Mega Mpx (used on the D800 has a whole other yield than the d3200): from 70 to 135 mm from the best of SE and therefore to F5 to 135 mm allows you to make good portraits with a Nice blurry. Even at 300 mm f. 56 You get some nice portraits. It's a good travel companion and photo reportage. And it goes very well to make some landscapes in stacking. So I would call it a good compromise. Now there are 100-400 both Tamron and Sigma, but they cost twice as well. Often you get distracted in technicalities from the real goal: think and take pictures. And often I also have to soften the portraits because they are too sharp. So only advice taken thinking. If the subject is good it is both at F5 and at f 2.8. Who complains that it is dark or is dumb or is of competition: when you buy it you already know it can give you. On the sharpness speech remember that under the 1/200 the micromove from the mirror increases and not little. That's why the FF among other things is favored: then use the LV to make good use of the stabilization. |
 | sent on May 26, 2018 Pros: Value for money, excellent stabilizer, focal range, weight Cons: Sharpness not always excellent, interlocking hood Opinion: I bought this lens in 2011, when it was in its kind perhaps the best on the market, and on 350D and 600D I was very pleased: autofocus fairly quick, excellent portability, great usability, no problem F/B focus. Paired with Sigma's 17-70 f 2.8-4 I was fully satisfied for many years. But passed to 6d and then to 70-200 F4L is, I realized that I switched to another world, so I understand the distance between a cheap lens and a pro. I would recommend it compared to all the same band, even Canon; It is certainly infinitely better than the 55-250 around, but I do not find it comparable with an L series. The real flaw, unfortunately present also in the last Tamron, is the hood with interlocking. By dint of using it, you wear the joint on the lens, and the hood becomes unstable, until it is unusable; The replacement of the hood is useless, because the worn part is on the lens, requiring intervention in service, unreasonable for economic reasons; The high-end Canon lenses in my possession do not present this problem. |
 | sent on May 26, 2018 Pros: Cost, sharpness (when used at the right aperture), autofocus, Lens hood included. Cons: Weight (but it was budgeted), bulky lens hood Opinion: Taken and tried for 3 weeks, I can tell me more than satisfied with the product: I have read technical reviews that have also helped me to better manage the diaphragm (at 300mm f/11 offers excellent sharpness) and already at ISO 200 my D5500 manages to the best loss of bright And I can say that those who complain about the slowness of autofocus do not know what standard is accustomed. That said, the hood is cross and delight: useful and valuable, however it is not functional when it is hooked on the reverse, and prevents the zoom to be used in a functional way. Price and weight, known well before the purchase, are the other two bills, but also on weight, it is not that it is so burdensome. |
 | sent on March 13, 2018 Pros: Cost; dimensions; stabilizer; definition and sharpness in the center. Cons: Undeniably dark; sharpness at the edges; autofocus does not always engage and slow down, with little or too much contrast. Opinion: My example, like many others, is well made and its sharpness in the central part is really good. I compared this 70-300 with the 70-300 USM "old" and 70-300 L Series of the Canon and I noticed that the sharpness in the middle is right in the middle between the two models. On the sides the old 70-300 canon is identical to this if not inferior, while the L series is better as you hopefully seen the 1000 euro that you spend more to get it. I tried the new Canon 70-300 USM II and it is better, but the difference is not so noticeable.rnSu APS-C this lens is perfect, because the loss of sharpness at the edges does not bother me because the lens portion is not used from the sensor, while on full frame you notice a little. I must say that most likely those who have had problems in general has not raised the doubt that it is a star model, as it also happens for lenses series L or Nikon pro (denigrate as always a lens just because it is not prodeight from the renowned I do not go down) .rnIo recommend it especially now that used has reached 200 euros and with this price is really the barrels.rnStabilizer effective 4 stops, clear and well contrasted .. these pros are enough for me and who it is not a pro or who does not need a quick connection. I would only change it for a 70 200 f2.8 only for the brightness in the interior. |
| sent on March 12, 2018 Pros: sharpness to all openings, light, stabilizer, value for money. Cons: a little slow autofocus and sometimes not very precise. Opinion: I have it for two years and I must say that I am fully satisfied because it offers very clear shots. Then not having the Canon, with which it is often compared in various reviews, I can not judge the differences, certainly the canon will be better but also the price .... it is different.rnIn conclusion, I fully recommend it to those who , like me, do not make a professional use even if, and I confirm, the image quality is very but very good.rnPosseggo also the younger brother 17/50 and I am fully satisfied with that too. |
 | sent on March 12, 2018 Pros: Nobody Cons: Too many Opinion: I tried this lens for some time before giving a judgment and in conclusion I can only say that it is really poor, between 80mm and 200mm, at any aperture, the sharpness is really poor, as well as get a shot to punishment to decent and impossible penalty therefore, you will have in hand a lens only in theory 70-300 not being able to fully exploit it in all its excursione.rnIl VR and 'AF work quite well but it is a meager consolazione.rnNon therefore trust the flattering reviews on the various forums with little money in addition you can buy the original Nikon counterpart. If you want a lens just to play, save money and buy a non-VR |
 | sent on January 10, 2018 Pros: excellent quality, price, stabilizer ratio. Cons: nothing at that price Opinion: Having 18 months I can say that if one wants to spend the right quality price without fainting and go on a bianchetto 70 200 f4 with other prices I find it very valid. Coupled first to my 550d canon and now 80d at the mugello with the motogp I made some nice photos. It has a 4-stop fear stabilizer that locks the image and helps a lot in shooting in motion. I do not use it much for the long focal length but the straconsiglio. great |
 | sent on December 03, 2017 Pros: Value for money, very good stabilizer, very versatile lens Cons: af not lightning, it is not a monster of sharpness, dust enters the lens Opinion: Optics from the really good quality price ratio, I use it with pleasure on my 6D, perhaps one of the optics that I use more, it must be said that to have a sharp picture I have to close the diaphragm very much, at least f10, 300 mm not is the top but you can bring home the shot, in my specimen dust enters the lens, I have no idea whether it is a factory defect or not.rnLeggerly dark but I was aware of what I bought. |
 | sent on October 28, 2017 Pros: Great value for money, excellent sharpness up to 200mm good fake 250mm, stabilizer, AF speed, colors, FF lens Cons: Sharpen to 300mm, brightness (but at that price you can not expect so much) Opinion: Lens used for more than a year on the Canon 600d and I must say I was astonished! With such a low price it has a really remarkable yield up to 200mm! In my opinion, better than the Canon base. It has a good stabilizer and a really fast focus that has never given me any trouble in the action shots! I have passed to a 70-200 2.8L and the difference is abysmal, but I do not regret the purchase I had made (surely it served to make me bones). rnWelcome! |
 | sent on August 12, 2017 Pros: Value for money, full aperture up to 250 mm, ultrasonic AF, stabilizer, included lens hood, chromatic aberration resistance. Cons: The lack of the tripod ring, but at this price I'm so happy. Opinion: I use it on my 100d and never disappointed me. Exceptional sharpness up to 250 mm at full opening. At 300 mm is a little less sharp and you have to close the diaphragm slightly (from f / 7.1 up). Ultrasonic AF fast and accurate, even with little light. Stabilizer really extraordinary: you can shoot at 1/30 to 300 mm without micromass! It resists very well to chromatic aberrations and the hood is included in the price (they are not broken like Canon). The only flaw is the lack of the tripod ring: this is a pretty heavy and bulky goal, especially when combined with lightweight bodies such as the 100d. As a result, even using a sturdy tripod the weight is unbalanced and the machine tilts forward. |
| sent on August 11, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, Absolute Chromatic aberrations absent on apsc, Great stabilizer, af, Price, focal excursion. Cons: For the lens type and price range, nothing relevant Opinion: Solid and well-constructed, beautiful images, clear and well-defined, good some hesitations with low light, excellent stabilizer. A bit bulky and long with mounted hood, it does not have a constant opening, but its market share is normal and you Can find little in the used. For the price it offers enough, it really is a good goal. |
 | sent on July 12, 2017 Pros: Stabilizer very good, excellent sharpness up to 200 and with f 8, price, weight. Cons: After 200 you "take home" the shot .. in the raw something gets recovered.If not a lightning strike, especially the semibuio Opinion: Use on FF.rnsono passed from a 70/200 vr f2.8 Nikon to this ... (performing, yes, but very heavy). I thought I was disappointed .. beh ... that's not it. RnBut the two optics are not comparable, from the point of view of yield, since I do not use it more for work, but sporadically as a cameraman, I consider it a very successful one Object.Nightly lightweight, lightweight (less than half of the nikon) ... it costs 1/6 but there is absolutely no proportion in the yield! Stabilization surprised me. I took the free nightbreaks with closed diaphragms And passionately long times, and looking at the home photographic monitor, I was contented.Col stand, diaphragm 11 at night, outline of palaces, lit, clear, with nice "stars" due to the diaphragm ... rnIn the light, Of course, no problem. In the past, I also had the stabilized Nikon 70/300 ... I think it is lower than the Tamron, especially in stabilization. I recommend it to anyone who is not going to print poster ... and want to spend a little. |
 | sent on May 06, 2017 Pros: Cost, sharpness up to 200/250 mm already af / 8, reasonable filter size (62mm), phenomenal VC system, also suitable for FF Cons: VC energivoro, with hood is a sight obscure, bulky; It's not a featherweight (but it's a 70-300), 300 is not perfect, not instantaneous focus (but not too slow), lack of zoom lock, with hood mounted on the contrary it can not zoom Opinion: I claim that I mount it on my d3300 (which without lenses weighs about 400gr), so the lens is unbalanced by the car, is disproportionate to the small size of my entry level! With mounted hood is Gigantic! Beyond the constructive quality (I'm sorry not to have plastic in order to hold 800 grams of weight), I think there are some bad things, such as the absence of the focal block and the fact that with the hood mounted on the contrary it fails to Use the zoom ring, which explains the reason for its not high cost! If you can overcome these defects, you can appreciate the true quality of the lens, ie the lenses and the VC. I optically liked it, F / 8 is sharper than 18-105 (which in my opinion is a qualitatively comparable zoom with this), the VC feels and is noticeable, it is very effective, far superior to the VR of the 18- 105 of nikon, allows to make shots even at 1/30 if not less than 70mm, and at 300mm i have been able to imagWithout micromassage at 1/125 and probably could keep even longer times! Useful for outdoor photos (it's too dark for indoor), I have not tried it yet to use for sports photography, but I have good hopes! I really liked it as it did in the portrait and in the street (yes it's long and you notice, but if well camouflaged it's not being seen by the subject, keeping the naturalness of the moment) |
user25351  | sent on May 03, 2017 Pros: Quality sharpness sharp colors AF fast and precise stabilizer great. Solid construction quality Cons: Bulky hood Opinion: I've been around for about a month. Do different tests. Taken in different situations. I really liked it. The AF is fast and accurate. The stabilizer is great. His best give it to f8. I have tried with big bird type flying herons not lost a shot. The colors are very beautiful and the sharpness is great. The mount on Canon 60rne talks very well. Sincerely, I consider it a beautiful goal. Only the long hood is very long, if you fit a filter it is almost impossible to reach it at least for me, maybe I have short fingers. € 400 paid in store. I highly recommend it. |
 | sent on May 02, 2017 Pros: Overall lens quality and price Cons: Not tropicalized Opinion: I personally find this lens my favorite because it gives incredible clarity and precision, comparable to the Nikon homologue and in some cases better (in the middle in some conditions). Even the focus is up to expectations even if you can lose the subject in case of particular backgrounds (this has never affected my shot anyway) .rn Although not very recent one is still one of the best in circulation and I'm really curious to try the G2! RnIf I just have to find a defect is the absence of tropicalization that could make it comfortable even if I used this lens mostly in closed and dry spaces (indor sports or portraits thanks to its f2 .8). Rn |
 | sent on May 01, 2017 Pros: Great construction quality, fiery focus on the Alpha A99 with the active autofocus limiter. Very clear from f8 onwards. Cons: NOTHING. Opinion: Paid 190 euros used but as new. I immediately got feeleng, I immediately sucked it over 220 mm. You have to close at f8 and at 300, even if you use it with sharp images (but it is quite normal with almost all optics). Many complain about the slow MAF, it will be that I have a lucky specimen, I do not have this problem, I expect to use it on a FF SONY A99 which has as standard the focus limiter that narrows the field a lot and allows it to focus Fulminea. Slight enough, the hood, is a little bulky but it's from that "long" touch that does not hurt at all. I've had both the small 70-300 little brother and the SAM 70-300G who did not give me the same satisfaction and I paid him more than twice used. I really recommend it, not suitable for small bird life (for that there is 150-600) unless it's really close, but with large birds, flying is a show. Absolutely to have for street and tourism photos. My version is SONYAnd does not have the stabilizer as it is in the car, will that work that well? |
 | sent on April 21, 2017 Pros: quality / price ratio, weight, stabilizer Cons: Hood cumbersome, focusing not fast Opinion: I had this goal, he bought and resold twice. I am not a professional but in any case I can only confirm what we read the reviews written before me. For the price you pay it really is an excellent lens, the stabilizer helps a lot even though the focus is a bit slow. Sharp the right (but not too much more than 200mm) is an excellent choice for those who want to try. But using it you realize you want more and for that reason I sold it. It is still an excellent product. Recommended if you have a tight budget. |
 | sent on March 29, 2017 Pros: Price Stabilizer, Sharpness, Weight. Cons: Slightly noisy, bulky hood, MAF not always fast, Tropicalization, distance MAF a bit 'long. Opinion: Bought new online recently, I have to say it is a good product with a good price-quality ratio. Used still a few times but I have to say that is giving me good results, considering that I make a purely amateur. Good image clarity, good construction, not too heavy. The MAF is sometimes not very fast, but maybe they have not yet found the right setting. I have yet to try it in situations of low light indoors to test if the stabilizer really makes a difference. All in all, at the time, nothing to complain. Maybe if it had been too macro or with a minimum distance of MAF it would have been better. |
 | sent on March 21, 2017 Pros: stabilizer and sharpness Cons: perhaps the stabilizer noise Opinion: I sold and bought back many times this goal, the opinions in the comments are always discordant, can assure you it has nothing to envy to the Canon L series after many field trials, the only reason why I sold it for a pass brand to another, the buy back a thousand times and did not even need enormous lens hood attached. Soon I will buy unless you want to take the fixed focal lenses for all |
 | sent on January 20, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, accuracy vr, very accessible price, convenience, general building solid and compact Cons: For the price range anyone but is not weather sealed. Opinion: It was my second objective purchased and do not regret it affatto.Credete which is one of the few goals that you feel alive when you use it? You ask them to snap and he will respond with a pernacchietta to say, ready! The VC ovviamente.Rumoroso but really well stabilized, I shot 130 and the picture was clear. I have not seen substantial declines sharpness at all apertures, Ta is crisp but a little less at the edges but it's not important if you are looking a bokeh of course, if you want a landscape shot you have to close at least f8 like all so the fact that it is dark or not is relative, considering that there are targets of focal, ie diaphragm that cost from 2000 on. Do not liken it to 70-200 f2.8 Nikkor because I have not tried it but we talk about goals for 2000 EUR guys, that I bought at 250 and does its job. negative points? None of those statements dagl'altri because it is not a fixed, all the paintings that I saw from 200 up have considerable hood. The only flaw is that it is not tropicalizato.Plasticoso but if you are looking for a goal to use instead of the hammer I do not know ... Buy yourself a hammer, they are otherwise sensitive items, any goal, maybe not out m inside you, whatever. If he were really tropical conditions it would use in any situation, because it really is true. Maybe also resists well to the rain but I do not know and I do not want to risk rovinarlo.Se someone has used in similar situations let me know, I would recommend it for portraits with studio flash, landscape, reportage and especially sport all aperto.Ps l ' I also used to dance essays in the dark in the theater, it goes. |
user36759 | sent on January 16, 2017 Pros: Excellent build quality and good ones optics, noise and good speed (although not instantaneous) AF Cons: none for the price range, but it would be really perfect (in my opinion) if he had a shooting distance shorter fire Opinion: It is a goal of excellent build quality, dall'autofocus fast enough, not really lightning, and often silenzioso.rnHo read that is better than the Nikkor consideration, but to be honest I've never experienced the truth of this assertion with a comparative direct. I can only say that a hobby is a great acquisto.rnNon understand the complaints about cumbersome hood: true it is, but absolutely suitable to the type of ottica.rnrnL'unica feature that I wished had this objective is a minimum focusing distance a minor fire, we also say about a meter would have been one more point in its favor compared to Nikkor.rnMa real defects and their does not. |
 | sent on January 15, 2017 Pros: Price, stabilizer, sharpness Cons: bulky hood Opinion: I'm not a professional, but in my experience and in relation to my needs I believe that this lens (taken from a few days) is exceptional for clarity and for the quality of the stabilizer. A focal around 200 mm and aperture 8 is fantastic. A 300 mm lose something if used at full aperture, improves diaphragm around 8. The only drawback a very bulky hood, but, perhaps, necessary. The stabilizer does impression both for the efficiency that for the noise that produces during its operation. This last aspect you forgive when you realize you can get sharp photos by taking 1/50 with zoom pulled to 200-300mm. Someone compared it to optical by at least a thousand euro. I am not able to do so, never failing to try, but I have no comparisons to make. |
 | sent on December 03, 2016 Pros: outstanding stabilizer, sharpness, autofocus, price. Cons: With the lens hood in the rest position, you can not 'use the goal. Opinion: Great paintings, with value for money fairytale. It 'a goal that is unsurpassed sharpness and precision, then the stabilizer does not miss a beat and freezes l' image. Using this' optical on canon 7d mark II and the operation and 'as to stand up to much more' expensive goals like canon and nikon. Its sharpness and focus are of prim 'order; 70 to 300 is flawless. L 'autofocus but not lightning fast enough to allow use in sports optics, brightness' F4-5.6, not del2,8 level but I guarantee that it is not' bad. Recommended to the full !!! |
 | sent on November 30, 2016 Pros: Stabilizer, auto focus, clarity, versatility Cons: For now, no Opinion: I bought this lens for long perspective, with an excellent stabilizer and autofocus to be used for sports photos and landscapes more ... No I can not help it when I go out to photograph ... I also tried the Nikon but I Tamron I was impressed as well stabilizes with his little noise that characterizes it, is perfect ... nn misses a shot even in photographs sportive..qualita great price, I recommend him highly for its sharpness over 200mm..a 7.1 is a bomb !!! |
user63463 | sent on November 10, 2016 Pros: Stabilizer, price. Cons: Above and below 200mm f8 the quality descends much. Opinion: I own this lens for a few months before a specimen bought used then sold for the stabilizer problems (communicated to the buyer), bought back again and made to calibrate Polyphoto. I honestly believe that the quality is overrated, discreet only f8 up. Over 200mm then is worse than my Canon bridge. I have not seen a single photo on the forum that justifies the votes over 9.0. The use of 80D, I also have the Canon ef-s 10 18 stm and sharpness is not even comparable, of course in favor of the small Canon. RNP. S: I think that would be more correct to put photos without pp in the reviews of objectives. So really we see the quality of optics. |
 | sent on October 18, 2016 Pros: Sharp also TA; Quick AF; outstanding stabilizer Cons: Hood a little cumbersome Opinion: Great optical canvases on its price range do not think can be beaten. I use it a few months ago with satisfaction of D7100 and I have to say that returns colors and details notevoli.rnAnche the Af is not bad, of course, will not be comparable to 70-200 VRII but it does its job in a dignified manner. My specimen is even sharper wide open even at 300, I was lucky nell'accoppiata optical-SLR. The stabilizer is then I think the winning absolute of this canvas, blocks the image with an audible hiss but it is a guarantee that takes your dall'agguato of blur. The only counter quoted refers to the hood really big and cumbersome even for storing in the bag, but for lovers of "big is beautiful" is a treat. Recommended. Rate 9 |
 | sent on October 17, 2016 Pros: Stabilizer excellent, crisp, well built. Cons: missing the lock to keep the lens blocked when you have the car, with the hood mounted on the contrary it is impossible to use the zoom in the neck. Opinion: Good telephoto lens that completes my current lineup of optical with the Tamron 17-50 VC and Canon 50 F1.8 STM. rnDevo say I am very satisfied with the performance objective, is quite bright but clearly going towards 300mm must be careful in situations with no light elevata.rnlo advice vivamente.rnuniche things that "do not like" this lens are: l ' the absence of the small "lock" to lock inadvertent lens aperture when you have the camera in the neck or shoulder and the inability to use the zoom when you have the lens hood reversed. RNLA second is an extreme situation for me, because I always have the lens hood even if the machine is turned off at the neck. It could be a sheaf for those who do not use the lens hood and is used to hold the contrary optics for not having to put in your bag and take it off if necessary. |
 | sent on October 10, 2016 Pros: effective stabilization, sharp (up to 200mm), good construction, versatile, lens hood included Cons: AF not fast, and yield to TA over the soft 200mm, has not the block for the ring Opinion: I use it very often (for photos Canon version) paesaggisitche from 3 years (of old 5D and 50D), with him I am taken away a lot of satisfaction !. The stabilization is very efficient and silent, very good sharpness up to 200mm, well begins to drop, the 300mm (also closed aperture as f / 8 or f / 11) always returns soft images that make complicated crop interventions. The building is decent, with good quality plastics that return a good feeling but nothing to do with the L series of Canon. The af is precise but not lightning-fast (I do not do photo hunting, so for me it is not a big deal), the lens does not have the lock to the ring, this will mean that when you will not use, and will be facing down, optics is allungerà alone (very annoying) .rnSecondo me is worth the purchase, the price / quality ratio is outstanding! New is on € 340 (I got it used in good condition at about 230 &€;), at those prices I would absolutely recommend, you will have a versatile lens (70-300mm) with some changes that will give great shots! |
 | sent on September 27, 2016 Pros: tonal contrast even at maximum focal. significant microcontrast to about 175mm. quality / price ratio in the incomparable class. Cons: The "constitutional" limits of the project. Opinion: I had in this temporary trial lens for a period of time not sufficient for a comprehensive evaluation, and yet sufficient for the identification of some salient features. The response is: has exactly the qualities that give it, with temperate limits of the price. Specifically: remarkable resolution up to 175mm focal length. In addition, the cove resolution up to intolerable values ??for professional use, but the tonal contrast remains at unusually positive values ??for the category. |
 | sent on September 15, 2016 Pros: quality / price ratio, good sharpness, stabilizer, lens hood Cons: Af not quite fast Opinion: I bought this lens on my 70D, previously had a Canon 55-250 stm economic, not having the ability to buy a more professional L-series Canon I decided to focus on this. Whereas mine is an APS-C have a focal range multiplied by 1.6x, or 112-480, which is not bad for a zoom. I'm happy with the purchase, the difference with the previous lens you see, the photos are sharp and clean, I expected a little more from focusing saw the ultrasonic motor, but at that price it's fine. I recommend it to those who have an APS-C like me and do not want to spend a fortune, because in the future if one wanted to make a change in level and move on to the FF can still use |
 | sent on August 23, 2016 Pros: Price, stabilizer, sharpness, focal range. Cons: I do not find fault for the version Nikon. Opinion: Taken today by the dealer. But I already knew this goal to have envied me to a friend who lent him on several occasions .. Sharpness at all focal lengths. Great for portraits, fauanistica, sporting events. outstanding stabilizer, AF good once the subject hooked would not give up even if it moves suddenly. This Tamron is worth much more than the price paid compared to other peers paintings costing more like his brother Nikon that I consider it a lower pelino. Highly recommended purchase. |
 | sent on August 10, 2016 Pros: Price stabilization, crisp Cons: AF is not a splinter. Opinion: Hard to find fault considering the price which is venduto.rnBuona construction, very sharp and also to 300mm is still good enough although less than shorter focal, very good to f8.rnL'AF is decent but not super fast and the lens hood seems some debole.rnIl My sample has a front / back final focus.rnIn problems is an excellent lens in relation to the price. |
| sent on July 25, 2016 Pros: Construction, range of focal, beautiful hood included, stabilizer Cons: Sharpness, heaviness and encumbrance, the inaccurate zoom ring Opinion: I purchased this objective used on ebay a few years ago to replace an older Canon 100-300 f 5.6 in my loan and I was very disappointed by the poor sharpness at longer focal lengths (200-300mm). The photos taken at the moon with the Tamron were decidedly less sharp than those made with the old Canon with the same focal (300 mm), among others, the Canon has not even stabilized. Result: I sold, after less than a month, without losing anything to luck. Another thing I did not like about this lens is the zoom ring, rather hard and "jerky". I think for the price that is new is better to add something extra and focus on bianchino, although shorter. |
user86352 | sent on June 23, 2016 Pros: stabilizer, price, details. Cons: I believe no one saw the price. Opinion: It 'a year I use the Tamron and immediately I was very glad of the stabilizer in practice stops the scene as if it were on a tripod, photos are clean and with good detail. also use the Canon 24-105 3.5-5.6 and I can safely say that the photos are better with the Tamron I highly recommend it if you can not take the 70-200 seen the diversity of one thousand euro price less. Perhaps Roy72chi will have taken a Tamron 70-300 defective because I do not see them right all those defects also does not give me problems because I can not find the hard indeed ring and very light so I highly recommend it with 300 euro you take a great canvas. |
 | sent on June 22, 2016 Pros: Stabilizer Cons: 200 to 300mm to say the least painful. Construction and solid feel from pure toy. Opinion: Taken and returned after a couple of days. The zoom ring was so tough that ran jerkily. At 200mm even seemed to have arrived at the end of the race, it was so tough. Probably defective at birth. Although not suffering from back / front focus problems, since the 200mm was so soft and kneaded it even stopped down to f / 8-11 managed to be decent. It will be true that you take back to "only" 300 €, but a yield scandalous like that had not even my old 55-250IS first series on the 70D. The fact is that I restored back and I took the new Canon 55-250 IS STM which, although plasticky, is built much better, (bayonet separately) costs half and the yield is consistent and clear to any Focal also to edges of the frame. Personally I definitely do not recommend the Tamron "toilet" in favor of the Canon 55-250 IS STM if you aps-c, otherwise recommend spending more and take a bianchino. |
| sent on June 22, 2016 Pros: Versatility (especially on FF) - Stabilizer - weight / size - Price! Cons: If I find one: AF a bit 'slow with poor light and lens hood "excessive" Opinion: Having also had far more "noble" zoom / tele as well as expensive, I can say with knowledge of the facts that this 70-300 - referenced to zoom hand hiking - definitely worth more than what it costs! The use of Canon 6D and 7DMkII and in both cases I get photos more than decent. With the FF then it is almost a "handyman" and the factor "crop" of APS-C brings its "length" the equivalent of 480mm, certainly sufficient for distant subjects. Someone "laments" a slight softness to "TA" beyond 200mm, personally do not understand the reason for wanting to insist on getting the most to "TA", just "close" f / 8 (which also did it with much more expensive optical, to get the maximum sharpness ...) and the "problem" is solved ... for against, the excellent stabilizer which is fitted to this objective, allows to earn easily stop 3 without risk of micromosso.rnPesa relatively smoothly and comes in a medium sized bag, while I do not like it at all excessive lens hood, with one mounted do not pass unnoticed ... and in the rest position does not allow to act on zoom and Maf, but it is a "classic" of the optical Tamron, nearly a price to pay ... rnSe I have to find a functional defect, I would say that the Autofocus - low light - is not fast; but in low light, most or all the objectives are in crisis, except they do not have optical light, but exponentially proportionate to the costs luminosità.rnConcludendo, I think for what it costs, and for its versatility (especially on FF) is perspective to have in your kit, knowing her and knowing she use you can take much satisfaction (and I add that: "if it was white and it cost three times, would be" for all "a great goal" :-D |
| sent on June 15, 2016 Pros: Economic, vc system, fairly sturdy construction Cons: Sharpness over 200, missing the extension block Opinion: Unfortunately I go a bit 'counter. I have this target of around 8 months. I gave him time, I tested in different conditions of light and tried it on different bodies ... result? I resell it as soon as possible! It 'true that it's cheap, it's true that the vc system works fine, but it is useless if you have 250 photos are not sharp ... 300 do not talk about ... On my way to see the performance ratio price can not compensate for deficiencies which for me are too important for a telephoto be considered valid (I also include in this discussion the lack of extension block). |
 | sent on May 25, 2016 Pros: Sharp price stabilizer 5 year warranty. Cons: zoom ring a little 'tough. nothing else saw the price. Opinion: The first impression is of excellent sharpness at all focal lengths, also usable at full aperture. It will not get the resolution of a fixed lens, but if the shot is correct, the difference must really look carefully watching the image at 100%. Even the bokeh is not bad; you can make good portraits 100mm f4. Unlike most I see well even resolving to 300mm, and the contrast is always great. The stabilizer would say, powerful. But be careful to use it only when needed, and leave the second to work well, otherwise you will lose sharpness. Contrary to what usually many do, I leave it off and active only when times drop below a certain threshold. Doing so can make the most of 'optical clarity. very good building, not at the level of the Canon L series, for example, the zoom ring is duretta, is not as fluid as the canon pro, but there is the advantage that sets a focal remains pretty firm, also the Barilointernal tto is stable and does not play as it does on many zooms too expensive. Autofocus great and even accurate, does not seem to have the back front focus issues. If you serve in these focal FF landscape, wildlife, this is perhaps the best choice under 500 €. For portraits you can get good results between 70 and 135mm shooting at diframma everything open. Although ideal for portraits remain large openings fixed. In conclusion, for € 300 it is also too much stuff, good Tamron. I do not understand those who accuse him of little detail; or the variability of the specimens is high or there is some error in the shot. It can often be linked to these shake-focal. Here a fine move down 300mm f all open, tell me if it is not clear: http://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?l=it&t=1857893 |
 | sent on May 24, 2016 Pros: Construction, price, VR, MAF usd, final quality above 200 Cons: Nobody Opinion: The sharpness is very good at all focal even at maximum. Having first 70-300 Sigma APO unregulated, with the difference that you see and hear. The weight for me is a pro because it makes you realize the quality of optics. Well built. Lens hood supplied with spectacular petal. The stabilizer also allows you to reduce the time without losing qualità.rn |
 | sent on May 11, 2016 Pros: weight, clarity, price, focal length, VR, usd Cons: VR noise, lack tripod mount, then for what I paid none. Opinion: Before buying it I read a lot of reviews and tests, undecided whether to buy or ques'ottica bianchino without or with IS or Sigma 70-200 OS, then I found a used 150 € and I immediately rushed to pick him up. At first contact, used to my Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO EX first set, I liked the half kg less abundant, although it is not exactly light, into place, and next time, the quietness of the USD, while vr when the toggles feels a lot (with 18-55 stm purchased for videos it is unnoticeable, while the first series iS noise compared to this feeling was even less). The VR although not exactly compensates for 4 stops, but three seem safe to me (maybe I hand quite firm), allow me to leave the 70-200 2.8 doubler and the monopod at home or in the car with a total weight in less than two kilograms, which in less backpack feel all right. The sharpness is very good at all focal even at maximum, considering the decay of my 2.8 duplicated seems to me that if the play, anzthe. There is not much I have to, but within the first shots I was thrilled. I recommend it as new as the favorable value for money, even more to use (of course if found in good condition and at a reasonable price, or better again about 300 € in physical store or online, and even less with a long warranty long). I do not regret not having taken the bianchini as MMT have a price far higher than the conditions that often have, not to mention by new (especially the IS). I quickly discarded the 2.8, the first for the cost (I am a amateur photographer and not a professional, so the equipment does not repay the costs faced), then for the weight that would have forced me to always leave something at home to risparmiarne a bit, something that most times the other hand I did with what I already have. One thing that perhaps I would have liked would have been the presence of a tripod mount, although already with VR it does without the 90% utilizationnormale.rnrnAggiunta of 31/05/2016 ATTENTION TO FILTERS THAT PUT IN FRONT OF THE LENS front. After putting a UV filter Cokin I realized after some time that the optical performance had changed for the worse from 150 up to any aperture, but at first I thought to a possible failure to stabilizer (and even if the I switched off the situation did not change) as images in magnification to 100% showed a kind of vibration. After only a few scervellamento day I realized that the cause was the UV filter (I think not digital) will appear before the lens. I also tried a filter 1A and the problem manifests the same even if to a lesser extent. I eventually taken away even that and the benefits are back perfect. I hope will be of help to someone who is puzzling as I did. |
 | sent on May 04, 2016 Pros: Price, Sharpness up to 250mm, well built for the price Cons: Quality over 250mm Opinion: is used below 200 €, back to about 300, one can not ask for more. As for sony if the plays with the 70-300 G which is, I believe, around € 800 and then to nearly triple. It's fine even at TA, better closed 1-2 stops as each lens but it is already very good at wide apertures up to 250mm to 300mm have to close because it makes very good but it never eccelso.rnPer how expensive it is well built well, everything plastic but with little play. It 'sa Best Buy |
 | sent on April 23, 2016 Pros: Quality / price, VC system, pleasing Of Focus, Construction, Lens FF Cons: Brightness (but for the price ......) Opinion: Personally I find this a winning lens from the quality / price ratio: FX VC lens and top of the range. First of all I think is to highlight the fact that the lens is FX and thus of APSC sensor is used only the "heart" of the lens reducing distortion and chromatic aberration (in fact I have not found it). rnUn applaud Tamron for its VC image stabilization system, really good. rnForse a bit more brightness would be welcome ... but then the price would lievitato.rnHo noticed a great blur (bokeh "onion" typical Tamron) in portraiture. rnInsomma a lens that is bought and held in life because it's not extreme classic paintings that always makes comodo.rn |
 | sent on April 20, 2016 Pros: Quality / extraordinary price: for that which costs you remain stunned for sharpness and build quality. Cons: I would be dishonest to specify these for what it costs perhaps improved engagement of the hood, but also a lack of custody "battle". Opinion: I'm not a fan of naturalistic hunting; mainly photographing landscapes and people, this is a lens that very little use, but in life you can never know, be "covered" to 300mm can always come in handy. I used it in the tennis tournaments, in a couple of nature reserves and "tighten" on some particular landscapes. I was surprised, the subject off well from the background and really competitive sharpness. To find a nit, maybe the colors are slightly desaturates, but nothing that can not be corrected within minutes of post production. But how do you ask for at this price? |
 | sent on April 18, 2016 Pros: very good value for the price, crisp, great stabilizer Cons: currently... Opinion: got it used, it is great with 6d, and stabilizer is very efficient, and very crisp and neutral with a good cromatico..forse performance is not lightning in focus but still performs well ... but I think that is unmatched among mid-level objectives .. the construction is solid ... and the hood a bit cumbersome .. |
 | sent on March 27, 2016 Pros: surprising stabilizer, solid construction, quality / price ratio Cons: A 300mm unconvincing, front focus problem solved with the 6d adjustments Opinion: Bell'obiettivo, solid and sturdy in your hands, the maximum focal leaves enough. perplexing (my old Tair 300 mm. of the Cold War did not see it!) much better to a little over 200mm, the stabilizer is amazing although noisy, you can take pictures of unimaginable times. Really appreciable with intermediate apertures. You have to learn with some evidence when is the case of using the stabilizer and when it is to be avoided to obtain the best quality. It maintains good used vehicle value. advisable |
| sent on March 25, 2016 Pros: value, versatility, focal width, good sharpness, good stabilizer Cons: Forcing myself ... brightness and softness to CT images Opinion: A lens that allows you to have, thanks to its range, various shooting solutions ... makes me laugh a lot. I also like it for portraits to f. 4.0 as it also allows a nice effect bokeh and detachment of the plans. Made with good quality materials. Although the images are of good quality. To find defects must strive hard. I highly recommend it great value for money. |
| sent on March 24, 2016 Pros: Excellent value for money, good stabilizer, versatility, good focus, quality of captured image Cons: None of relevance Opinion: I used it on canon 60D with excellent result, for sharpness, color rendering, image stabilization. Easy to handle despite the weight and the size. So great in all respects. Dark? far more than sufficient for normal uses of a canvas. All in all a very good buy, does its job, and does it well in the right conditions. Highly recommended |
 | sent on March 24, 2016 Pros: Value for money, good stabilizer, versatility, good focus, image quality Cons: Softness over 250 mm Opinion: Paid about 300 bags, it is a very worthy objective in relation to price. The stabilizer is great although slightly noisy, but I always brought home good shots despite the times of shots relatively long compared to the used focal; the image quality has always left me satisfied, especially between 70 and 250 mm (over becomes too "soft", especially 300); good colors and contrast the lens returns; aps-c of little vignette, but of ff I never had the opportunity to mount it; the construction seems solid and making quite rapid and effective fire. Among the other hand, in addition to the softness above 250 mm, I would not report much: at this price it would be ridiculous to ask for higher brightness or tropicalization. For my personal experience it is a very good lens and plays very well his duty. |
 | sent on March 24, 2016 Pros: price hike, effective stabilization, made decent fire, good image quality Cons: construction, some variability of the specimens, brightness, focus Opinion: Always consider the price at which you can also find new, very convenient, so the flaws are there but almost "inevitable." The lens is a must to always have on hand, portraits, landscapes, reporting, you can do everything. Needless to mention the pro, you all know by now, so I will pass directly to the hand, to better explain the ones I added. -Construction Is certainly well made, but it is a great plasticone, not from a sense of reliability, but does his duty. -Variabilità Specimens: I Have had two, one for and one for Canon Nikon, Canon in the sample, for example, I noticed a certain dominant blue / purple, sometimes very annoying, forcing a few more steps in the post. In what Nikon, however, this dominance does not seem to see it, but I found a slightly increased noise stabilizer, compared to Canon model. A bit 'wide sleeves, probably, the qu controlsality, but it always comes back to price discourse .... Brightness: well yes, it's a little dark, when the sun begins to set, the ISO rise very quickly. The low-light also leads to the next problem; Levelling-focus: that if one part is pretty quick and quiet, the other goes completely broke down when the light begins to run low, and it is here that the low brightness does not help. All in all a very good buy, does its job, and does it well in the right conditions. It lies very easily in the used market, but often the price is too close to that of the new online. |
 | sent on March 07, 2016 Pros: Price, image quality, stabilizer Cons: Brightness but given the price you can not ask for more Opinion: I think worth every penny paid, really sharp at every point of the frame even at RT. surprisingly effective stabilizer. Of aps-c I did not notice vignetting annoying. Quite heavy, perhaps it could use support for screw the 'goal directly to the tripod. Autofocus quickly and accurately enough, extremely quiet. It will hear a small little noise when the stabilizer intervenes and when "off." |
 | sent on January 07, 2016 Pros: Price, effective stabilizer Cons: Image quality just enough to open diaphragm, improves very af / 9 Opinion: Bought for a trip, I'm just trying to use the canvas. Comparing it with other canvases (Canon) I tried, that is 70-200 f / 2.8 IS II, 70-200 f / 4 IS and 200 f / 2.8, of course there is no comparison. I'm just saying that after a couple of shots a bit under all conditions, the image quality up to 200 mm seems close to me or slightly higher than that of the 18-200 Canon, a handy, certainly not brilliant. Above 200 mm is even worse, at TA the images are rather kneaded. Those who are satisfied will enjoy it, especially at this price (288 euros VAT included, with hood and free UV filter). Stabilizer really ok, nothing to say in this regard. Embarrassing vignetting on full frame. With hindsight, between having it and not having little difference. UPDATE: After a trip during which I often had to use the long focal lengths, which I usually do not like, I can say that my exemplary bestself closed at af / 9 and focals up to 250 mm; under these conditions and with the right light the riresults are more than dignified. It does not have the character of "whites" but at this price, I repeat, you can easily settle down. |
 | sent on December 28, 2015 Pros: Solid, more than adequate AF, versatile, attractive price. Cons: Appropriate quality at affordable price. Opinion: Let's say I was - is - flawed in judgment from having had the Canon 70-300 L el 'excellent Tamron 70-200 VC; It is a great handyman universal weight (denoting quality construction) but easy to use. The optical quality is decent, good sharpness, lightning-fast yet accurate AF, as well as color rendering. I did not expect miracles, but for that price it is absolutely worth the money them all. rnConsigliabile. |
 | sent on November 11, 2015 Pros: Precision, stabilized, rapid great clarity at every point Cons: nobody Opinion: Bought recently but the results are already visible eccellenti.rnRapporto money good, maybe a little bit heavy, but we are talking about a 70 / 300.Lo recommend it to anyone who does not want to invest large sums, with dedicated their original manufacturers of fotocamere.rnUtilizzabile for several shots, I think I will concentrate mostly landscapes with special highlight not disappoint me, I know from the first 200 frames executed rnPaolo |
 | sent on October 29, 2015 Pros: Many: price, build quality, image quality at all focal lengths, perfect interaction with the camera, speed MAF equal if not superior to the originals, efficiency stabilizer, chromatic aberration virtually nonexistent. Cons: Given that the brightness does not interest me, nobody. Opinion: Purchased even after reading the reviews on Juza and strong excellent results obtained with the Tamron 16-300 and 28-300, I must say, in this case, to be fully soddisfatto.rnLa image quality it seems to be even higher than that of Canon 70-300 DO, with a cost equal to a fifth though! The bokeh is more than acceptable, not exceptional considering the opening; TA I did not detect vignetting. Not very compact but if you do not have a shortage of space does not matter; the weight is in line with the type of lens and the construction is truly accurate; the five-year warranty, although not valid for any subsequent purchaser, is a plus more than welcome. Ultimately, a goal certainly advisable, exceptional price / quality ratio. |
 | sent on October 28, 2015 Pros: Lightweight, balanced, effective and fast enough stabilizer but incredibly valuable, very valuable ultrasonic motor. Cons: Lack objective extension block. (+ Nothing more ...) Opinion: Bought after much research and why they can not at this time afford the harrier 70300 Canon is. I was impressed by the sharpness of this goal as well as large stabilizing qualities suffice to say on rainy day house lights low you can take pictures posing b 400 iso showcase dark mahogany wood with glassware canon 650 d with obviously good support surface but free hand to 300 ,,, 480 APSC 5.6.Che to say ... no parole.Con Kenko extension tube you can go up to 30 cm and make a photo rainy day light house environment in macro mode so my opinion is perfetto.La based on practice and having different objectives tokina, Tamron, Canon ... etc ... of confronti.Posso say that compared to the Canon lens 75 300 4 5.6 III USTM comparison and merciless ... credevo.Veramente not happy because the price : ollo store bought 295 euro.Consigliatissimo. |
| sent on October 18, 2015 Pros: Very clear from 70 to 200-250, discretely at 300 f / 5.6, good at f / 8, best price performance ratio, sensational stabilizer, good and included hoods.rnBen correct chromatic aberration and coma. Cons: Zoom ring that turns in reverse, a little 'soft at 300 af / 5.6, a bit' cumbersome as a dimension. Opinion: It was my first telephoto zoom. It is light enough and fits comfortably with other objectives in the bag for an excursion.rnThe image quality is good, not exceptional but satisfying, especially considering the price at which it is located.rnFrom 70 to 200-250 is clear and well resolved already at full aperture, at 300 unfortunately becomes a bit 'softer at f / 5.6 while improving a bit' closing af / 8, which is always his sweet spot. As far as I could see in my copy, the optical aberrations are correct, there are no problems of front or back focus and the vignetting is modest and easily solved in pp.rnrnThe really strong point of this goal, however, is the stabilizer. It is exceptional and allows you to take pictures on dense sensors like that of my 70D (20Mpx apsc) even at 1/20 of a second, or about 4 stops. This of course framing still and static objects. If you take pictures of moving objects, the stabilizer must be switched off.rnThe stabilizer, in thisI'm objective, it's also great for solving any problems of micro moved.rnComodo also the fact that the stabilizer is activated when you activate the AF, then while the lens focus, in the viewfinder (or on the screen of the live view) you see the image well and steady.rnConsigliato who, without wanting to faint, wants a telephoto discreet / good at a good price. |
 | sent on October 18, 2015 Pros: Excellent sharpness, price, excellent hood included with the lens, great zoom Cons: Anything Opinion: I can say very little since I bought it last night, but the little that I used it I can say that is very good picture, zoom is great catch things far away, I saw, as I said a friend, who for this goal the least minimum zoom is the maximum of a 18-55 mm and it is true indeed, perhaps even a hair more. rnNon being just a zoom for close-ups, but they still managed to take pictures of my kittens as first floor but not zooming too. The stabilizer is great. I just have to get used to a little weight but nothing that's just to take confidence. Also excellent hood;) rnHo purchased this goal to mediaworld and spent 349 Euros this was the stabilizer, one without costing 180 Euros, but I preferred no doubt spend more money for a good cause obvious rnal moment I can not complain. rnNon wait to make new pictures and I know Tamron 70-300 mm can only amaze me every day more and more; D |
 | sent on October 13, 2015 Pros: Price of the new, stabilizer, quick focus Cons: sharpness, weight Opinion: After using it for a year on 55 300 nikon, decide to go to this tamron remaining disappointed given the reviews, I made two steps backwards in terms of sharpness, it outclasses Nikon at all focal lengths equal to 300mm aperture times ... nikon is much higher ... only gain was the focus other sounds, the stabilizer does his duty in a noisy way. He said that for nikonisti highly recommend the 55,300 of Nikon as crisper, more leggero.rn .. |
| sent on September 29, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, stabilizer, value for money Cons: weight Opinion: I'm using this tamron 9 months and I must say that I am very well, has a very good sharpness and also the stabilizer does what it must. I think that for what it costs we can not have more. If we find the only flaw is the weight, using a half-day free hand when you return home you feel a little fatigue but this is a very relevant issue. I highly recommend this Tamron, you will not regret. |
 | sent on September 18, 2015 Pros: Stabilizer truly amazing, Unexpected Sharpness and cleaning Image 300mm, Construction Solid, precise focus ring, Ultrasonic Motor with nothing to envy to Canon. Cons: Light game on the bayonet when mounted on the camera, zoom ring that runs in reverse compared to Canon. Opinion: I possessed the Canon 70-300 IS USM and I expected to get rid of it to switch to a Sigma 70-200 f / 2.8 EX OS HSM. rnAvendo revalued on how to invest temporarily available budget, I gave away the Canon and I wanted to bet on this Tamron 70-300 in combination with a 6D and then with the possibility to cover the missing stop aperture with the large capacity of 6D ISO up to and maintain the image of that lens pulita.rnLe expectations, after reading several reviews, having viewed several different tests and test beyond. rnSiamo much on the Canon 70-300 IS USM inexplicably costs about 100 euro more than this lens, but that is really far behind in this building Tamron.rnLa touch is perceived to be above it. The optics transmits strength and solidity ... is heavier than the Canon and not of poco.rnQuesto Tamron than the Canon it has a true ultrasonic motor ring with the possibility of "Full Time Manual Focus". The fire is accurateand fast as the Canon's ring-type USM. The difference on the firepower with the corresponding Canon is abysmal. The Canon has the front lens that rotates and stretches when focheggia thus creating diffcioltà to be able to use certain types of filters and does not allow manual focus without first sgnacia engine. The Tamron is extremely faster, as quiet as you would expect from fire engines ultrasonic, the front lens does not rotate and does not stretch during the fire and then you can use all the filters without problemi.rnI two strengths that I have really hit of this lens are the stabilizer and detail. We are very, very far from Canon ... stabilizer you see right away that it is a different category. It emits more or less the same hissing when the Canon comes into operation, but the picture is really glued edges once it enters into operation. I could take to 300mm (three hundred millimeters) with times of 1/20 (one twentieth) obtaining an image in sharp focus and without any kind of micromosso.rnInutile saythat Canon will not get to this level because of a significant loss of detail to 300mm which alone tend to knead the immagine.rnCon the Tamron 300mm f / 5.6 we continue to have a truly noteworthy detail ... the image is engraved, clean, crisp. Probably not having tried the best performing as a lens 70-200 L f / 4 I have no benchmarks higher but with my old Canon 70-300 IS USM are definitely on another planet. rnL'ottica and makes it so much, probably complicit in this excellent 6D. I wanted to bet on this objective preferring 100mm rock at an aperture of f / 2.8 classics 70-200. To hazard a bet that I had to mature confidence that it merges with a 6D, the latter has its more than excellent performance at high ISO. For now it seems a winning bet. A lens with a value of really high level. |
| sent on September 10, 2015 Pros: Clarity, soundness, value for money, excellent stabilizer Cons: A little heavy. Hood too flashy, zoom ring for me uncomfortable. Opinion: The use of 6d. For the price it's a great goal. Very sharp. It loses a little bit around 300 but nothing serious. The stabilizer is very effective and fast-focusing lens (not to the levels of 70 200 is f 4 canon that I tried for a long time). The thing I like least is the forward position of the zoom ring, for me uncomfortable. I would have preferred that the fire far and the zoom as close on canon.rnIn synthesis, for less than 300 € you can not ask for more of this type of lens. |
 | sent on August 30, 2015 Pros: sharpness, quality / price ratio, soldiità, focus, stabilization Cons: weight and size, not fixed f4, MAF sometimes inaccurate Opinion: I was torn between this lens and the original Canon of the same level but in the end I opted for this, and I have not regretted it at all. The value for money is great and gave me great shots even in low light conditions. Photographs taken with this lens can be viewed in my gallery. The solidity of this lens is very good, and sends some confidence, the lens is also equipped with a big hood. The only flaw is certainly not just the weight and the diaphragm is not fixed. I used it on a 600D and the couple was perfect! The contrast is good and the focus is pleasant. |
 | sent on August 29, 2015 Pros: Price (!!!), stabilization, sharpness, contrast, blur, building Cons: Weight and size, ring absence tripods Opinion: Bought with the Sigma 10-20mm about a month and a half ago, this goal I fully exploited only in my last trip to London. rnSi proved a lens truly sublime, the sharpness is superb at all focal lengths, as blurry (we talk about use of APS-C, let alone on FF!). The stabilizer is a godsend, especially when shooting at the maximum focal length, and is very good at his job. rnPagato just under 300 €, I was afraid that there was in a trap, but it proved a really smart buy track, showing the excellent voices on build quality and image: quality / price ratio 10 + .rnSe really want to find fault, I I quote the following dimensions: I agree with those who called the hood "of exhibitionist", because it is almost as long as the lens and makes it bulky and awkward, especially in crowded places. The weight is felt very, using this lens on a Canon 550D, and could have used the presence of a ring Treppiedi. |
 | sent on August 12, 2015 Pros: Price, stabilizer excellent, crisp and clear TA, handyman for many occasions. Cons: Weight, in some panoramic photos I noticed nuances of the blue-green Opinion: After reading the opinions in the various posts on the site, I finally proceeded to the purchase. Recatomi in the store (the one advertised here too), with 300 € I could know our capabilities this lens Tamron.rnCome reiterated by other readers 70-300 is very solid, does not stretch and lowering the weight but feels We get used to. (D90 + Tele = 1570 g.) RnHo made several tests and the results impressed me: in nature photos in the plants I noticed a good sharpness, bokeh sometimes amazed me, considering that I was used to Nikon fixed 35mm 1.8rnLo zoom with stabilizer responds sublime, I worked very wide open and no pictures move, even though I were in positions not very solide.rnL'apertura F4 did not disappoint me, I shot at night in the street and I can say that if it were not for some of the parameters I had set wrong, the photos have managed benissimo.rnLa color rendering is excellent and fairly faithful, although in some cases I noticed some strange shades of blue, perhaps my mistake in post produzione.rnDi macro if it can not do, but "croppando" on some shots of flowers, I could get good magnification of particolari.rnLeggevo the difficulty of some readers in focus on subjects against dark backgrounds, like a bird on a plant: in fact I had the same problem a few times, but this depended on the shooting conditions negative, counter-light or low light. Spostandomi side I could work around problema.rnScegliendo the diaphragm and suitable setting of the day ISO 200 and 800 in the evening, I managed to make the shots more than satisfactory. In broad daylight with light lens from the best of himself. The evening logically forced to use high iso and other artifizi.rnSicuramente a lens with this super low price is recommended. I have tested in all TA from the balcony of the house photographing the chimneys of nearby houses, with amazement I enlarged the photo and the result was amazing, you could see clearly the details of the chimney, as seen in the test between the Nikon 70-200 and that theNo oggetto.rnSolo in some details I noticed a sharpness lower than the Nikon 35 mm, but this is what has to be a handyman 70 mm. without rancor comunque.rnLo advice for those who do not want to pay high figures and at the same time want a good tele home Tamron.rnBuona seratarn |
 | sent on August 01, 2015 Pros: Stabilizer, sharpness, contrast and value for money Cons: Weight and hood I add the lack of ring to the stand Opinion: I took it because I needed a tele and the capital was reduced, reading a bit 'around I addressed this lens. I'm using it for 4 months, I'm not a great expert, but I can say that the stabilizer is great, long focal lose some 'quality but otherwise I do not see major flaws, the contrast is good and if used with a filter polarizato you even better results. Defects ...... The weight but you get used, the hood once mounted is a bit 'loose, but maybe it's just in my case. Honestly the ring to the stand I would put, I have some difficulty when I use it with a tripod (do not have a tripod from 30 € ???) Anyway for what it costs is a purchase more than good. |
 | sent on July 29, 2015 Pros: Cost is mainly sharpness Cons: Well ... to nitpick perhaps AF speed but in the end there can be seen the band covering. Opinion: So ... considering that after buying the winning combination d750 + 14-24 .... I was like you say ... slaughtered on .... I opted for something cheap and before leaving I needed a tele ... I had spoken well and I had tried to borrow on the d7000 with great success and unexpected yield up to 200 (after becoming morbito) ... so I had the opportunity to take used by a colleague in conditions like new! Well I must say that today I did every test imaginable can be ... that I Abina to an SLR with a capital r ... but I was surprised by the yield from 70 to 300 ... and up to above 2000 ISO produces files beyond all expectations! If you want to understand whether a lens like this for you without fainting I highly recommend it !!! |
| sent on July 16, 2015 Pros: Price, sharpness and stabilizer Cons: Dim, AF Opinion: What I appreciate about this view and value for money. The sharpness is excellent and the stabilizer works overtime to any lengths focali.rnDiscreta and AF that in some situations it hard to engage. Also a bit noisy but not excessive and fastidioso.rnAnche if constructed for the most part of plastic material, presents solido.rnLo Board |
| sent on July 12, 2015 Pros: Great price / value ratio, sharpness, stabilization, contrast, dx / fx Cons: At first a little heavy, but you get used to using it often Opinion: Bought a couple of weeks, I use it with satisfaction on D7100. The lens has a yield truly excellent, only 300 lost little sharpness (but imperceptible), high speed focus and contrast. Another point in favor of the Tamron is fully compatible, in addition to the right even to full size. The only downside is the dark, but all in all the other lenses of this kind are not very bright. |
| sent on May 17, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, stabilizzazzione, contrast, quality / price Cons: pesantuccio can be balanced and not with the car but you get used quickly if used often, missing soft bag Opinion: Bought and used by about one year of Nikon D5200. Excellent overall performance, quality, construction and sharpness even beyond 200mm, stabilizzazzione eccezzionale.Buon blurred and can also be used on FF. A lens from the great value that must not fail to learn to use a canvas. opening F4-5.6 normal like the other 70,300 in trade |
 | sent on April 30, 2015 Pros: Low price compared to Canon products. Performance average but improvable if you know the operation. Cons: Sometimes not guesses focus in conditions not exactly optimal. Opinion: Objective is not absolutely evil. I tested in extreme conditions to test and passed the test well enough. The lens is well-built and solid enough. The weight is relatively light and it is not difficult to carry for long periods. In good light conditions the lens has yielded good results. The auto focus is fast but not fast. Sometimes it only occasionally can cause blurred images, even when the conditions were excellent and the image was perfectly focused in the viewfinder even if only visibly. The tests were all handmade libera.Ho bought the lens for nature photos of animals. When the light is good, the percentage of high-quality photos. In low light situations or animals moving the percentage of clear pictures down a bit '. My results were very different in quality. In some sequences, the results were spectacular, the photos were sharp and high contrast with great color fidelity. For other ifcies in different conditions the pictures were out of focus. So it is also difficult to see if the fault is partly to be taken to the camera, the photographer or the lens. For example, I suspect that the Tamron does not always work well with the 70D in automatic mode "sport" when the focus should be rapid. With the control in manual mode it seems to work best but not always. All in all, the Tamron is a good lens and it is worth buying, especially for the price. In my opinion it is a lens that we must learn to use it and with time you will get the benefits. The product is good, but not great, then to use in the best conditions. |
 | sent on April 29, 2015 Pros: Price sharpness construction Cons: zoom range outside Opinion: Bianchino sharp as the more or less at all focal lengths. AF rather different from the canon 70,200 f4 slightly worse. Very compact usable for all. Really I recommend it to everyone plus it can also be used on FF. For portraits sharpness better than a 100mm f4 70. photo hunting I would say that the VC works and is the minimum lens that you must avere.Escursione focal exceptional I would not say that loses a lot between 200 and 300 contrary to 300mm can be used. The hood from exhibitionist is as long as the goal. |
 | sent on April 21, 2015 Pros: Quality lenses, sharpness, stabilizer and price Cons: Building exterior plastic although well done, lack chance to put tripod ring. Opinion: My experience with this is about a month, I took it instead of the usual 70-200 f4 L series of Canon for my EOS 60D, rnper via the price of many reviews positive.rnDa my part, I have really surprised at the quality of the images is really very good and stabilizer really efficientern (allows you to shoot handheld avoiding blur even with less light) .rnLo blurry I like very much, as well as the bokeh.rnConsigliatissimo especially on APS-C where according to me the best, given the sharpness especially in the middle and then because of the crop factor, rnpraticamente throughout the image already TA.rnLenti of great quality and value for money then a really high. |
 | sent on April 11, 2015 Pros: Price, autofocus Cons: Plastics not excelled. Opinion: Purchased from a few days, price € 274 new, more I can not pretend, fast autofocus, stabilizer fast, reliable brightness coast, but at this price meets a lot, only if I have to define defect I find plasticky perhaps too plasticky, but the hood valid plastic, to me, it seems a little delicate robust even if the joints on the optics are great, now that is new, but with time I have doubts about the tightness due to friction and the consequent consumption of plastics |
 | sent on March 20, 2015 Pros: Price, autofocus, sharp enough even at 300 Cons: Nothing. Opinion: Good goal, at this price is not better, it took on a trip to Ecuador where he made 1000 shots, all of excellent quality, aim to have if you do not have a high budget, lens hood, zoom very fluid, plastic of good quality, more with 300 euro is not niente.rnCerto if it was a total f4 was tops, but would cost the doppio.rnConsigliatissimornrnRoss |
 | sent on March 16, 2015 Pros: AF speed, price, solid construction, sharpness very appreciable Cons: like all telephoto lenses midrange diaphragms 4-5.6 must be offset by more high ISO and Shutter Speed. Opinion: excellent stabilization, said fourth stop but I think it is excessive, will actually be 2, the ring good, positive body stability, diaphragms high ... at night clearly will be sacrificed the ISO that will prove to be higher than colleagues F / 2.8 in exchange a little light ... super affordable price range and I highly recommended |
 | sent on March 05, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, stabilizer (with a steady hand to 1/10 shooting), money Cons: boh, for 300 € I would say that I do not see. Opinion: Arrived yesterday and still little used to give a true judgment ... However, according to some tests I've done I can say that: RN1) I was in doubt between the 70-200 and this for months and because of the price they are finished choose the less accurate ... I was afraid that as sharpness could disappoint me and instead I was pleasantly surprised. Really nice and preciso.rn2) Needless to say, it is a bit dark etc ... Obviously, costs 300 € and not 1200, be satisfied in fact. Perhaps the AF is a bit slow in low light and when there is too little just let it go but I do not think it's a problem for me since I do not do sports, and that given the low performance learn to focuse hand with more care .rn3) As everyone says after 200mm begins to suffer, but if you quit a bit and then PP will help with some changes you can still get good results. At full aperture is an instant soft at all focal lengths, but nothing scary ... between f8 and f11 behaves very well! RN4) I was afraid for the blurry, judged by some "unwatchable" but even there at the timeI loved it. It all depends on which fund you choose, that depends little on the qualities dell'obiettivo.rnInsomma in conclusion I would recommend it to anyone looking for a good paintings at a low price;) |
 | sent on February 17, 2015 Pros: price stabilization, quality / price ratio Cons: was f / 4 L IS would be better :) Opinion: Great lens from the very contained price and quality more than satisfactory. Taken as an alternative to the canon 70-200mm f / 4 L IS, that "point" again, but for now will not buy, given the price difference and the 100 mm longer (sometimes return their profits) in favor of the Tamron . As lens from portrait to these focal prefer the Canon 135 f / 2 L, but for my trips to the mountains, the canon 17-40 (attached to the camera) and the Tamron 70-300 VC (in the backpack, to be extracted in the case of sightings of animals or landscapes "long") are a good combination. |
| sent on February 17, 2015 Pros: Price, maf, stabilizer, sharpness Cons: not very bright (but in line with all other 70/300) Opinion: I could do a copy / paste of the review of Thomas Farina, add that to me is already good at 6.3, well let's just meglio.rnanche for me is an objective 10 and praise especially if I think I paid 276 euro . RNLA difference that best known from a Canon L-series, is the smoothness of the rings .... logically win the L series hands down, but overall the rings of the Tamron are not all that I can say that the brightness male.rnriguardo is in line with all other 70/300, in that: one before buying it knows that does not buy a f 2.8, but I feel equally good for most of the photos, those looking for something bright .. logically takes qualcos'altro.rnottima for me also zoom range ... sometimes 200 mm are short, and have a 300 can help in many cases. |
 | sent on January 16, 2015 Pros: price stabilization, autofocus and sharpness Cons: dim Opinion: I purchased the lens in question as tele-rounder for use in landscaping and traveling. I'm definitely satisfied, for me it is a lens 10 and praise especially in relation to the low price of around 300 Euros. The stabilizer is phenomenal and autofocus fast enough, used to f8 diaphragmed gives shots always very clear in my case even at maximum zoom range. Highly recommended for those who like me is a sporadic use of canvas and has no plans to invest large amounts of money. |
 | sent on December 22, 2014 Pros: Focus lightning and extremely quiet, stabilizer, clarity and lightness. Cons: An enclosure in the package (such as zoom Canon) would have been appreciated Opinion: I bought a month ago to replace my former canon 70-200. After a thorough analysis of all the tests on the web I was convinced to buy this Tamron lens. What to say? And 'perfect ... I use it on my 5D MarkIII and is simply fantastic, speed MAF also excellent in low light conditions, efficient stabilizer. I was amazed by the sharpness of this lens compared to my former bianchino Canon. The quality / price ratio is staggering. Can not recommend it! |
 | sent on December 21, 2014 Pros: Silent and light stabilizer fantastic, zooming thrilling ..... cost. Cons: Not much sharper than the 150 mm .... very rough or noisy over that threshold ... not very light Cmq enough "portable" Opinion: Hello to all ..... Then after mounting on my 5D mark 2 is blown to the eye the speed of focus and stabilization lightning something very valuable for this tele .... that instead of me and I from still to think about is moved or the "noisy" (as they call it in many) ... rncioè if I have to do a photo at 70 mm (minimum fire) still okay but just look at it on the screen and magnify the most of it immediately notice the blur even if I use a tripod and mirror lockup .... I would not be a failure of the machine or the same lens .... rnHo seen here of the photos taken with this aim but is not anyone this defect ( apparently !!!!!) rnForse the only thing you should do is to focus and adjust them manually and do not trust the stabilizer but also doing so to me the photos are moved zoomandole .... what do you think ????? However advise everyone to use the manual setting on the machine as well and try on the lens .. |
 | sent on December 20, 2014 Pros: AF, stabilizer, focal excursion, price Cons: Plasticky, general yield, little bright Opinion: I state that it is a lens that I used on APS-C and probably on FF is more indicated; The first impression was of a lens plasticosa although well built, AF and stabilizer excellent, especially the stabilizer has recovered me almost 5 stops on 24MPX APS-C under different circumstances; On APS-C format at the yield level, the colors are poorly decided, the lens tends to burn the lights a bit, at TA at 70mm has obvious chromatic aberrations that go away by closing at 5.6, in principle is a lens to use on this format between 70-150mm between f 5.6-8 , above 150mm must be diaphragmed F9-F11 where the phenomenon of the difraction comes into play and the AF tends to have a slight back focus, however too dark for some shots; In the portrait has a bokeh and blurry passable, at 150mm at close distances from portrait tends to accorciarciarsi as focal to an equivalent credo on the 100mm; I recommend this lens to anyone who wants a tele zoom all make alternative to an 18-200mm and can't afford a 70-200 2.8 (which nonetheless is always preferable, better yet, especially in portrait, fixed and bright lenses). |
 | sent on November 24, 2014 Pros: Excellent value for money, not too excessive weight, good colors, good sharpness, autofocus fast enough ,, stabilizer noisy but excellent Cons: Slightly soft to 300 mm but nothing that dim Opinion: First, as many have said the value for money is nothing short of excellent .. I used it for a whole day and I was very pleased. The stabilizer and noisy but does more than his duty well, autofocus is pretty fast, softness on 300 mm is slightly noticeable perhaps depends on the conditions in which you shoot. In any case, light and not very evident. rnil weight quite content but do not know how far my impression may be useful as I use in combination with Canon 24 70 LL known to be rather pesante.rnIn any case it is highly recommended and for what I saw to what I know at this price there is almost nothing better. rnciao all |
 | sent on November 21, 2014 Pros: stabilizer deadly sharpness at certain focal Cons: excessive weight and bulk Opinion: I mount the Tamron SP 70-300mm f / 4-5.6 Di VC USD for EOS 600D with the crop factor so the focus is even more thrust. The first thing you notice is the size on the one hand is an advantage because it gives security, but on the other hand is a little too bulky necessarily need a backpack, simple bags are not enough. the hood is huge. the stabilizer is amazing, one of the best on the market, frozen image !!! f good and not too noisy. excellent sharpness, but lost a little over 250mm. brightness "typical" of a canvas. great for amateurs, unbeatable price. I recommend it |
 | sent on November 04, 2014 Pros: Excellent stability, good focal length, excellent sharpness up to 200, good for up to 250. Cons: Soft at room temperature and above 250 mm, extends the zoom by. Opinion: I bought it while I evaluate the replacement of the Canon 55-250, I was torn between the canon 70 200 f4 and this Tamron, but the price and comparisons that I found around and I could personally have made me lean towards this goal. I am fully satisfied, it is perfectly usable for portraits and for wildlife, the detail is amazing especially considering the price and the stabilizer has made incredible, can earn about 4 stop.rnConsigliatissimo |
 | sent on November 04, 2014 Pros: excellent stabilizer, Cons: poor accuracy. disastrous to 300mm - First version- EXCELLENT the copy which I was replaced Opinion: I bought 40 days ago, after reading a number of very positive reviews. Now things are: a) do not know how to use; b) I took out a bad product c) is a poor object (but in this case I can not explain reviews ...) I have a Canon 18 135, by many referred to as a pretty lousy aim. I took more pictures as evidence and it is always better result, even doubling the magnification .... Does anyone have tips? Update: After months of trials and two steps in technical assistance to me has been replaced. The new is excellent. Meanwhile, I had purchased the Pompone (100,400 L series1) and up to 250 challenge you to find differences. |
 | sent on November 02, 2014 Pros: Stabilization excellent sharpness even at 300mm, quality / price ratio Cons: Sometimes when you turn the camera does not start autofocus Opinion: I purchased this light in 2012, and what impressed me at first use is to stabilize highly effective and visible in the eyepiece of my camera, allows you to shoot easily even at 300mm at 1 / 50th of a second without micromosso.rnAltra peculiarity is the sharpness I would say very good even at 300mm and fully correctable in PP from 70 to 200mm is sharp like a knife giving files very well exposed with excellent resolution, but it is nice blurred (not mixed), not suffer from flare and not overexpose the foto.rnLa zoom ring is very smooth and the hood is well made weight is fine since the zoom range. For the type of photography that I prefer is perfect (still photos), but if the request has speed limits in both AF precision (I use it on a Canon EOS 7D) .rnA my opinion on the market, there are objectives that are at the even (especially for the price / quality) considered that the Canon 70-300 L costs 4 times as much, ifyou do not have to meet the sporting needs advice absolutely. |
 | sent on September 25, 2014 Pros: AF, stabilizer, quality / price ratio, focal length Cons: Sharpness at RT and over 200mm, construction Opinion: I use it for about a year on APSC (Canon 60d), mainly for racing. rnCome said, has a quality / price ratio really high. rnLe plastics are not the best to be honest, but you have to take into account that it costs about 300 €! The focus ring is not very smooth, but using it to 99% in AF is not an issue. The zoom ring is better, although in my example is a bit 'too soft at the end of the race. The lens hood is made rather bene.rnPer regard to optical performance, a TA sharpness is not the best, but close enough to a stop to get the best results. Using it often for panning, I have big problems from this point of view. RNA my opinion, the quality remains good up to 200mm, beyond which begins to knead too much detail. rnDavvero excellent stabilizer, which offers a great advantage especially for those who, like me, uses it on APSC. rnL'AF is quite fast, although a bit 'noisy as already shown in other recensioni.rnIn conclusion: for mie needs (car racing) is beginning to be tight for sharpness and AF, although I managed to get some good pictures. In my profile, you can find some for track use. I'm still satisfied, and highly recommend it if you are looking for a tele stabilized by the good performance and do not have a large budget. |
 | sent on August 26, 2014 Pros: Af ultrasonic, stabilizer, sharpness, quality / price ratio, bokeh, beautiful hood compared to the canon of 100-400 and 70-300L, build quality. Cons: Missing limiter distances of MAF, stabilizer noisy, IQ at TA 250 mm up, lack of tripod ring. Opinion: I own this tamron past two and a half months, a short time compared to others who have reviewed it, but enough to write this opinion. At first I was torn between the purchase the Tamron or the most popular Canon 70-200 f / 4 is and is not, however, telling me that I would have used on countless occasions and genres I decided to opt for the latter. Bought at a price of 280 Euros, quest'obbiettivo certainly not disappoint the expectations showing a surprisingly good sharpness diaphragm key personnel as f / 8-11, beautiful bokeh, best of 100-400 canon and almost comparable to its namesake series L, and showing off a system of ultrasonic AF ring (the best in all the optics in my opinion) as well as with a stabilizer that earns on occasion four stops in the use of time (you can take safely to 1/30 to 300 mm ). Although considerable pro convinced me all'aquisto of quest'ottoca, really cheap, the lens also has some small defect. First, the AF system: some talk of one of the best performing sisteI auto focus existing, but often I found myself waiting also 3:00 to 4:00 seconds (difficult shooting conditions) because agganciasse the subject well. In part, this lack is due to the absence of a limiting distances of MAF which greatly affect the speed, in fact automatic fire must try to focus on a subject at a distance range that starts at 1.5 meters and goes up to ' infinite. Despite this to happen in the hours when there is little sunlight, since the lens in question is a relatively lete "dark", this addition would allow MAF a much better performance if not twice as fast. Another flaw, in my opinion, is the noise level of stabilization. As soon as you turn it around for a second before shooting the viewfinder of the camera shakes and you hear a mechanical noise quite annoying that lasts when you hold down the shutter button halfway. Despite this, however, after a while you do get used. Alsothe sharpness to TA is another factor that is the subject of a thousand threads. From 70 mm up to 200-250 optics it returns detailed images even at f / 4-5.6 despite better still if closed by a pair of stop. Speech is far from 250mm up where there is a considerable drop in IQ and where, for sharp pictures and detailed, you have to close up to f / 11. Apart from these shortcomings there are other defects that do not affect the optics in itself such as the lack of a tripod mount ring (according to me superfluous given that good tripod support it also extended to the maximum focal length) and the construction relatively plasticky ( plasticosamente but good for a lens of the medium-low) .rnIn definitely not recommend this to those who aim only sports or nature photography (rather wait and take a good used or the 100-400 70-200 usm is not) but I recommend instead to those seeking a lens for all uses and in sostituzuione the classic optic kit APS-C, or at least to those who can not afford purchasing a series L. rnEDIT (22 aprile 2015) I recently bought a 70,200 IS II. The review, after trying this perspective more professional, remains valid and I repeat that the Tamron AF behaves very well, almost like the mythical toed without limiters distances of MAF, though, once you have entered these, there storia.rnVoto: 8.75 / 10 |
| sent on August 14, 2014 Pros: sharpness stabilizatore very effective does its job well Cons: a little heavy Opinion: and a couple damage I use it I am comfortable in any situation I find it very effective and a great canvas for money, a good construction and rispettto the highest-rated series canon objectives of the house is very well defended the council does not want to spend a ki figures very overpriced. and a very good value for money. |
 | sent on August 09, 2014 Pros: Price-performance ratio, stabilizer, Good Sharpness but unpretentious Cons: Yield that worsens over 200mm AF slow, plasticky construction, Darkness at longer focal lengths Opinion: For what it costs is a good choice, especially if purchased used on 200-250 euro.rnResa and good sharpness from 70 to 200, the stabilizer helps, is certainly no miracles but does his duty, as the construction is plasticky discreet and not tired when used for several hours, I recommend it to those who do not want to spend too much for a tele and has no great pretensions. The AF is a bit 'slow and sometimes misses the focus, we must learn to know him. I used it for several months last year on D7100 and some good shooting me are brought to casa.rnIn that price range there is not much better, but if you can raise the bar on slightly better than the Canon 70 to 200 f4 L and on the good old Nikon 80-200 f2.8. |
 | sent on August 01, 2014 Pros: Weight, good sharpness (but not excellent) throughout the zoom range, the stabilizer. Handy and practical. Price. Cons: Focus thread slow and noisy (at least my copy), when used in soft TA to any excursion. Not very bright. Opinion: Using this perspective on a Canon 40D, so APS-C which consequently becomes a 112-480mm and I would say that is a great zoom that performs its job very well. I have always had as Sigma lenses and I have to say that, indeed, the quality of this zoom is not particularly excels, however, is a good compromise quality / price. Has the great advantage that, if used for an entire day hanging around his neck, you should not go to the orthopedic control. |
 | sent on July 25, 2014 Pros: however slight (I use FF). good sharpness, I'd say up to 300mm; effective stabilizer, can also be used on 300mm 1/60s. price more than good, easy to use Cons: for now it is not known Opinion: I use it with the D700, I bought it because with nikon 24-120 F3.5-5.6 I could not shoot from too far away (portraits traveling). for now I used it in low light to a concert and came out satisfied. considering all the equipment for the FF that port in the backpack, the lens is actually compact and lightweight (of course everything is relative). August will see its effectiveness "in the field" for which I bought it: portraits on the road. |
 | sent on June 29, 2014 Pros: Excellent sharpness, excellent stabilizer, focus pretty fast. Cons: Weight, zoom ring a little 'lasts up to approximately 135mm, 300mm lose something to ta Opinion: Great goal, I was torn between the 70-200 f4 L usm and the Tamron to be used on an Eos 5DMarkII. I opted for the Tamron for the excellent quality of construction in relation to the very low price! RnAvevo the "fear" of sharpness is not as high on 70-200, instead of unfounded fear. Excellent quality up to 250mm, over becomes a bit 'soft at room temperature, closing at f8 the situation improves. rnun Another point in favor of the Tamron is the presence of the stabilizer (not present in 70-200) which provides up to 3/4 stop. With a steady hand you can shoot even in critical situations with times of 1/50 to 300mm.rnL 'autofocus is not as fast usm Canon, but still fast and silenzioso.rnInsomma for about 300 Euros is a bargain, satisfied of 'purchase and yield of FF. |
| sent on June 07, 2014 Pros: price stabilizer, sharpness, autofocus Cons: well it is not very bright Opinion: took a few days for canon aps-c instead of the 70-300 is usm canon mom .. the difference in picture quality is really striking, especially from 200 mm up, I honestly did not expect it so clear .. stabilizer is exceptional, I did shots at 1/40 to 300 mm and the blur is known only by enlarging to 100%, the autofocus seems very responsive .. to be honest I have not yet tried in low light conditions (such as building or concert), will make it soon |
 | sent on June 07, 2014 Pros: price, sharpness and stabilization Cons: weight and quality vary from specimen to specimen Opinion: Aquistai this perspective, at the insistence of a dear friend. The warnings from the very beginning was that I had to find a copy successful, because in his opinion and other persons to whom he had to buy the same vein, the sharpness and the yield of pure whites depended a lot to copy to copy. So I tried a shopkeeper who had provided at least a dozen with the availability to select a perfect specimen that reflects my expectations. I was looking for nikon mount but the specimens tested showed all the white hot kneaded and photos, with little impression of sharpness. After several tests and a pain in the ass to not be able to describe (for the retailer), I found a connection with 70-300 canon that even today I kept instead of the fantastic 70-200 4 for a greater focal length range and a better stabilization by at least 4/5 stop. What can I say, it's my travel optics, economic and handyman! Up to 200 is fine, 300 is very good. I can not speak well. Obviously, if I want to compare the 5DIII and 70-300 with the D800E and 70-200 vr f.4, I appena purchased, there is no story, but the 70-300 is always a great optic for the quality / price ratio. |
 | sent on June 06, 2014 Pros: Stabilizer exaggerated price Cons: Stabilizing a bit 'noisy. Hood overly large (as long as the objective closed) that prevents the use of the zoom lens when mounted on the contrary. Opinion: The details of construction are not very accurate: the lever of on-off stabilizer is pretty ridiculous. The cap rises / put in a somewhat difficult compared to the original ones are ok Nikon..però piccolezze.rnLo stabilizer is quite noisy ... but when you engage the subject ... is a show! A 300 mm image freezes !! Focus rather reattivo..rnLa sharpness is excellent up to 200mm after falls a bit 'but it's still on discrete levels. The focus is esageratornDisattivate stabilizer when using a 3ppiedi, otherwise the image will be completely moved, which however I had happened conaltre optical Nikon.rnrnLo council as an alternative of 70-300 Vr2 Nikon.rn |
| sent on May 25, 2014 Pros: Construction, stabilizer, price Cons: Weight Opinion: I am the owner of this light for almost 1 year old and am very happy with the choice made. The stabilizer is also phenomenal 300 mm ... Highly recommended for those looking for a tele with stabilizer without spending big cifre.Per ups is really eccezionale.rnSu internet are the MTF test of this perspective is not seeing them .... you will have more doubts whether to buy it or not ... |
 | sent on May 14, 2014 Pros: Image quality; engine fast and accurate, efficient stabilizer. Cons: Weight; I have not been able to find a tripod mount ring (I think I understand that there is to this point) Opinion: I am very glad I made the choice to buy the Tamron 55-250 to replace the canon, the difference between the two approaches is the subitissimo note as soon as you have both hands; the 70-300 from the idea of ??being well built and when you use it you can clearly see that the stabilizer works very well, the focus is very fast and the nuts on the cylinder body have the right clutch. And 'thinking but manageable on a tripod but not really suitable tends to make its weight felt. Great product for its price. |
 | sent on May 01, 2014 Pros: Quality, clarity, stabilization, MAF. Focal length Cons: It weighs ... but it could not be otherwise Opinion: I own about ten months and is wonderful perspective. Ideal for portraits and to steal moments of life in the city. Also used for travel nature has given me excellent results. The value for money is really remarkable. 350 € for a view of this kind are really very few. Can not miss in your kit. |
 | sent on April 16, 2014 Pros: Stabilizer crazy, colors, blur, image quality, good coverage of focal lengths Cons: lack custody, on a tripod low level to the focal length of 300 mm is not very firmly due to the weight ... not just silent auto focus and stabilizer Opinion: The construction of the lens is good (keep in mind that as far as I was used to the telephoto zoom Nikon 55-200 DX) the weight begins to be felt but not excessive. The sharpness and image quality are excellent and also the longer focal length does not seem to me that there is this big drop as it was. The colors are bright and very pleasant blur the 9 blades are felt. The precise focus is not always perfect but sometimes mistakes while the stabilizer is great I would say that 3 stop more you allow them a few times I even managed to make the shots to the focal length of 150 mm (APS-C) with time 1/13 of a second where you do not notice the blur. The size with the lens hood is remarkable, especially for me that I was accustomed to other objectives. The housing of the lens is unfortunately not included. the stabilizer is a bit 'noisy but patience ... rnSecondo me is the best mid-range telephoto zoom and bearing in mind that costs 300 € recommend it to everyone |
| sent on April 12, 2014 Pros: Quality between 70 and 200, accurate and price Cons: 2.5 Stabilizer 4 stop is not as stated Opinion: Great value prezzo.La sharpness and superior to that of my old canon 70 200 f2, 8 300 stabilizzato.A not lose a bit of nitidezza.Lo stabilizer works well if you do not go down to below 1/100 sec at 300mm zoom and 1/8 to 70 mm.Con longer we begin to see the mosso.In Ultimately though I would say that I am satisfied with anch io.Lo I will use from 70 to 200. |
 | sent on April 12, 2014 Pros: Quality between 70 and 200, stabilization, af accurate and price. Cons: A little 'soft 300 Opinion: It was my first tele and I am very satisfied. Between 70 and 200 has a quality comparable to optical band cost is much higher. It loses something in at least 300 and must be prepunched to f8, but it's still usable. He has a good degree of magnification that allows you to make closeup or macro when paired with the extension tubes. It was one of the first Tamron using an ultrasonic motor for af and has a stabilization eccezionale.rnstraconsigliato.rnAlberto. |
 | sent on April 11, 2014 Pros: For now I'll just solid, affordable, exceptional stabilizer Cons: Still I have not noticed Opinion: I recently purchased this remote and I have to say that first impressions are very, very positive: I am referring above all, at least for now, the stabilization really excellent, perhaps a little noisy, but who cares, it's very effective! I think it is also a lens pretty solid and well built, maybe a tad pesantuccio but this also makes it clear that there is much substance inside. From the first tests I can say that the pictures are pretty sharp but I have yet to try it in the most demanding conditions such as type of night. It 'also very cheap, I recommend it. |
 | sent on April 06, 2014 Pros: Objective cheap but good quality, excellent stabilizer. Cons: Over 250 becomes soft, precise AF in low light. Opinion: For those who do not want to svenare to purchase a lens and have decent results all in all, the choice of Tamron 70-300 might be the right one. Of course, if we look for the quality and clarity at high focal lengths (250-300) is perhaps the case of buying altro.rnPer who ventured for the first time on these focal highly recommend it. |
 | sent on April 03, 2014 Pros: economic-light-af-stabilizer ultrasonic Cons: to be clear how many lenses you have to close for a while, it becomes soft above 250 Opinion: The best 70-300 in circulation belonging to the middle class. The engine f is exceptional, very fast especially during the day, in low light slows down a bit, the materials are not comparable to the series canon of the house but I have to say that despite being plastic give a 'high feeling you solidità.Se want a tele with good performance without wanting to spend astronomical sums the Tamron has no rival. |
| sent on March 30, 2014 Pros: stabilizer amazing, it seems to me very clear, weight and discrete manufacturing that looks pretty solid, the lens is felt in your hand ... and is, for now, perfectly what I ask .... Cons: autofocus perhaps a bit 'noisy and not very fast but very accurate .. Opinion: taken recently used. here by a friend of Juza .. really a 'big iron' .. for what it costs I was impressed .. precise, crisp on the edges, the flare does not seem in pain, it is not heavy, it's pretty easy to handle even in the nuts ( perhaps a bit 'long race for the fire by hand in some cases, but you can manage it) .. I use it mostly for video .. tried in broad daylight with sun beating down, by hand, with the imaginable difficulties in reading the monitor and the viewfinder, the results were amazing .. the stabilizer is exceptionally up to a maximum length which in my case being aps-c becomes virtually 450 .. a good buy .. I highly recommend it .. 9 votes |
 | sent on March 24, 2014 Pros: Price Stabilization, Output Cons: Construction not excellent Opinion: I'm a "beginner" and mainly use my equipment for safari in Africa. I have used this lens and a Sigma 150-500 for the last event in January in Ol Pejeta (wild dogs) and Masai Mara and this lens has really clicked few pictures compared to Sigma for the same settings. During the first day of safari in the Masai Mara we found very late hour (sun already down for a while) a group of male lions (4) and photos taken with the Sigma are unwatchable while those with Tamron are ok and well defined in spite of the poor condition. I recommend it to anyone who does not want to spend a fortune on lenses and pull out decent pictures without asking too much. I look forward to try it in September with the conditions of "background" completely different. For me it is worth to spend 300 € for this lens. |
 | sent on January 27, 2014 Pros: Price / Performance ratio - Stabilizer Cons: Build quality is not outstanding - Autofocus slow Opinion: I had ques'ottica for a few months, in preference to the more expensive Nikon house. The stabilizer I was immediately struck by its effectiveness (though very noisy). Clear and detailed up to 200, then softens. rnOra I sold it and I got the Nikon 70-300 and I have to say that build quality as there is just no comparison. Nikon is the Nikon guys always. In addition, the AF is a lot quicker, the stabilizer is not perfect and I rumoroso.rnrnAncora test performance. Then I review it in its sezione.rnrnIn each case the Tamron for what it costs, it really is a great choice for those who want to start using this type of focus. |
| sent on December 13, 2013 Pros: Price, weight, yield (if you do not have too many claims), stabilizer in my opinion exceptional Cons: A little spring the zoom ring, just a sharp 280-300mm, AF indecisive in low light. Opinion: I took this lens more out of curiosity than anything else. It grips well even though on the stand and 6D we would have been well under a collar. Af fast enough in standard situations (with the 6D can focus on Jupiter and 300mm kenko 2X Afanche if loupe). Sturdy plastic but also has a great hood. On FF cartoon. Learning it you manage to bring out interesting shots. Personally I block to 280mm with an optional elastic type and photos that come out are pretty sharp and well contrasted. I think it's the right choice especially on APSC. I highly recommend ... if your budget is to not waste your time. |
 | sent on December 09, 2013 Pros: Cost, robustness, yield, stabilizer, AF Cons: Weight, Soft TA after the 250mm levers on-off on the side of low quality, brightness Opinion: A very good lens with which, however, I struggled a bit before you find the right feeling. Once you understand the operation of the 'auto-focus and vc take home masterpieces. Colors a bit cold in the counter-light (easily correctable under development), after the definition a bit limited 250mm (recovery closing enough to f/13) and weight (unbalanced very small SLR) are the major flaws of this lens , but, given the cost and the overall performance, you perdonare.rnA my opinion we are on par with the direct competitor Nikkor 70-300, and a level far superior to the Canon 70-300. rnConsigliatissimo to anyone wanting a telephoto fear without spending a fortune |
 | sent on November 17, 2013 Pros: Value for money, good construction, stabilizer Cons: a bit 'too soft under 300mm, weight, autofocus is not always perfect Opinion: was my first approach after the one kit, and I have not ever regretted it. Really worth the price, it is quite clear to the 250mm, is strong enough, Autofocus is fast enough, even if subjects do not suffer too much contrast, indeed much. It should be noted, however, that my copy, when it fails to focus on performing in an annoying noise. |
 | sent on November 07, 2013 Pros: A little of everything Cons: Lens not resolved Opinion: I must admit I was a little disappointed to be this magnificent obbiettivo.rnHa really all you need for a modern optical stabilization speed af Crazy excellent sharpness at all focal lengths and performs well in CT ... rnQuello that made me give only 8 of 10 in this lens and the lack of risolvenza and peredita of detail even at very bland crop 20% circa.rnCerto by zooming a bit ce expects it but thought after the thousands of positive criticism that reggese a bit of piu.rnOvviamente for what it costs either new or used worth every penny and more. |
 | sent on September 27, 2013 Pros: price, fast AF, not noisy, lens hood, good stabilizer Cons: size and weight (but for a 70-300 seems normal to me) Opinion: I took this lens to have a "hand" on APS-C body while hiking in the high mountains to photograph without much effort and quickly suspicious subjects (marmots, deer, etc. etc.) and are very happy with our purchase, the stabilizer works correctly, and the AF is quick, recommended purchase for the low price |
 | sent on September 23, 2013 Pros: Price, very effective stabilizer, sharpness up to 250/270 mm Cons: Lack tripod ring Opinion: I am writing this review today (after a few months of use in more 'situations) since returning from a day of bird life in the shed: Well I must say I was surprised by the yield of small Tamron! When used stopped down to f 8 f 9 even at maximum focal defends himself from the very best bene.Il to 250 mm f8 over distances in the order of 3/4 mt where looks good at all even with top targets ... A little 'soft at 300 but more' you can not 'hardly expect by a lens from € 340.Ottimo for portraits where it guarantees a good sfocato.Non 'some bright but with the yield at high iso cameras today this is not' a big problema.Assolutamente recommended! |
 | sent on September 16, 2013 Pros: good sharpness and excellent quality image stabilizer ultrasonic af that work very well exceptional value for money very manageable x coverage focal Cons: defects I have not yet found Opinion: it's really worth I was afraid I was hesitant to bring home yet another lens of low price and performance with clearly Scarsini instead is a lens of the highest level and quality has really exceeded my expectations congratulations to Tamron RNAF fast and quiet stabilizer to say the least strabigliante image quality is very good very good very manageable on nikon d7000 that of d700rn |
 | sent on September 12, 2013 Pros: Cost - Build quality and image - Balance and grip - stabilizer - the quality of the lens hood - light weight Cons: Sometimes autofocus is not lightning and can not focus on a subject with little contrast - slight noise stabilization system Opinion: Lens honest, quality / price I would say excellent, recommended for those who can not afford a 70-200 F2.8 professional or those who can not or do not want to have more than 1.5 kg of lens to take spasso.Tra 270 and 300 mm have to use it very closed (between F8 and F11), but up to 200mm may surprise you ... Recommended for most users DX format SLR that FF. |
 | sent on September 06, 2013 Pros: Price, stabilizer, color rendition and sharpness Cons: AF sometimes a bit 'slow, levers AF / MF and Stabilizer ON / OFF, weight, lack tripod ring Opinion: Goal that undoubtedly has a quality / price ratio exceptional. I've used both on 5D 5D mkII on with excellent results. The stabilizer works fine. The only flaw in my opinion (besides the weight) is that the keys AF / MF and Stabilizer ON / OFF are not recessed (like Canon) for which inserting the lens in the bag that I often move and I realize that after taking maybe the stabilizer is OFF! Then I found out 5D focus very slow and difficult on moving subjects. |
 | sent on July 18, 2013 Pros: Excellent image quality, af silenziso, ultrasonic, strong, good stabilizer Cons: For the moment, absolutely no one Opinion: I own this tamron by more 'than a year and I can only speak very well. I use it with a Canon 450d, a simple entry level, and it is giving me very many satisfactions. The picture quality is nothing short of outstanding especially at 70mm .... very convincing until 220/250mm...un bit 'soft at 300mm but it is normal. The autofocus is very fast and silent. The stabilizer really surprised me, simply excellent. Very solid and robusto.rnChe say, value for money that is not discussed. Home away from Home. |
 | sent on July 01, 2013 Pros: Absolutely a great value for money, excellent sharpness, good color contrast, very bright, fast focusing. Stabilization very good! You can do the close-up images to get a sort of "Macro" very sharp. Vignetting almost absent, except in low light. The weight is still acceptable and perhaps helps to stay somewhat active and more stable. With sufficient light the sharpness is at the top, and you can see it in the details of the subject! The light is different from the usual: it makes the components more interesting to observe. I found that the easiest post to make better picture itself, without going mad too much! Cons: In low-light or low contrast sometimes fails to focus immediately but you have to take it back. Support with missing despite the average weight that unbalances the camera on the tripod too. Start and end mechanically stabilizing a bit 'noisy. With little light sometimes the focus is not accurate. On the easel then I had to retouch it manually. Opinion: I wrote a long review with detailed photos in a gallery posted on my site. Here's the direct link: www.juzaphoto.com/me.php?pg=49617&l=it Maybe it's very long to read, but it can help those who are about to make a good purchase, without spending a fortune! For now I'm quite happy with the shopping done. You can find different prices on Internet sites, however, the average price is around 320 Euro and is great for offering the sharpness this lens! |
 | sent on June 08, 2013 Pros: Good image quality, fast AF, the stabilizer does its job well, good construction, lens hood, price Cons: to 300mm lose quality if you close the aperture to F7.1 at least the rest is fantastic! Opinion: After a year that I own every time I mount it on my canon seems as exciting as the first time! RnSoldi well spent! good image quality, a shame to 300mm but the quality is not a problem by closing the aperture by 2 stops, the stabilizer works very well and so far I'm satisfied! rnlo advice! :) |
 | sent on May 27, 2013 Pros: Fast AF, very good stabilizer, excellent lens, good materials, fantastic and hard to beat quality / price ratio Cons: for now not yet found Opinion: I purchased this for christmas and paintings from photos taken until now I can say I'm felicissimo.rnOttimo ache for portraits to the minimum apertura.rnLo stabilizer is very good, the structure is strong, maybe a little soft after 250mm, but the quality of 'optic is remarkable in my experience but also according to some friends a lot more experienced than me.rnPer the price (about 330 €) is the real deal. |
user17361 | sent on May 19, 2013 Pros: Value / Price - Capacity up to 200mm - powerful Stabilizer - Lightweight - Filter diameter - many aberrations contained Cons: A bit soft at 300mm - Af "fast enough" and without a limiter - the bokeh is not his strong Opinion: A lens that compared to the price is great but that obviously has its flaws otherwise would have cost twice as much, its biggest flaw is the bokeh, very bad in many situations, AF is silent, not very fast but still good even if a limiter would be beneficial , aberrations are really very small, soft to the maximum focal length, but how many zoom with a high focal length does not become?! rnNella its price range I highly recommend it, to have something better you should spend more than double ! |
| sent on May 04, 2013 Pros: Value for money overall, speed, focus, lens hood, robustness Cons: A little 'heavy, jerky zoom ring. Opinion: I was positively surprised by the performance of this lens, very fast in focus, brightness and good-looking solida.rnIl really is exceptional value for money, looking good goes away with a little less than 300 €, recommended for those who want to have a good product without going on professional lenses. rnOttimo also the stabilizer. |
 | sent on April 15, 2013 Pros: Price, durability, lens hood, AF, stabilizer Cons: I would say no, if you want to be picky sometimes blurs the AF to the max to find themselves, and lose a few moments, but it's a little thing! Opinion: A great buy! With 300 € you are holding a canvas that can give great satisfaction! Fast, quiet, well-made ... say that in addition, you will also see the hood! perhaps the only flaw is that it lacks the ring tripod, but for now I'm using mostly free hand, so ... rnLo recommend it to anyone, given the cost then ... It is definitely more! RnBuona light to all! |
| sent on April 15, 2013 Pros: Ultrasonic AF, stabilizer 4-stops, sharp image Cons: focal opening Opinion: If you have no need to shoot in low light, and so can do an opening of 5.6 to 300mm, then it is a fantastic goal! I changed only at the moment that I decided to switch to a 2.8 for the rest esigenze.Per I believe that it all his money (even very beneficial). RnrnPersonalmente the only thing I do not like is the extension of the zoom vary the focal length, but I do not know if competitors do the same. |
 | sent on April 11, 2013 Pros: AF fast, almost too perfect to 300 mm, very good stabilizer, Price, 5-year warranty. Cons: Indeed it is pesantino then the ring to the tripod would have been handy. Opinion: I have worked for a few days and I did find really great, so I sold my Canon 55-250 to go to the Tamron. The AF is really fast and accurate, able to maintain focus even birds in motion, the only flaw I noticed was the subject contrastai just a little effort to focus, but it compensates with the AF-Full . Excellent image quality even at the 200 mm focal addition you lose very little in sharpness between F8 and F10 from the best. The stabilizer is a bit noisy but it works great, vignetting absent. It 'sa bit heavy, but I must say that you hold very well, it has the right weight that makes you maintain stability, but this is entirely peronale. I confirm that it is perfectly compatible with the teleconverter 1.4x kenko pro DGX 300 is a big plus. For a little over € 300, there is nothing better. |
 | sent on April 07, 2013 Pros: Price, stabilizer Cons: Lack tripod mount ring, weight Opinion: Absolutely worth all the money it costs. Excellent yield up to 250 softens towards 300. Fast AF stabiizzatore very effective although noisy. Too bad for the zoom ring, outside that is covered dalparaluce supplied when mounted upside down and therefore unusable. The absence of the ring for tripod is somehow be overcome with the use of the ring for 70-300L Canon. Heavy and solid conveys a feeling of strength, has the zoom ring takes a nap. |
 | sent on March 17, 2013 Pros: Overall quality of construction, competitive price, sharpness Cons: Slightly dark and soft after 270mm (nothing to worry about anyway) rn Opinion: I switched to this after taking a couple of months earlier unregulated (model A017), two parallel worlds! RnMolto fun to use, the quality of the shots is not great when it is still very good, even in extreme conditions (for es. 300mm and TA). rnLo stabilizer is very very effective (something essential of these focal lengths), although a bit 'noisy, autofocus is accurate, fast and silenzioso.rnInfine is equipped with a lens hood very effective and of good construction . I recommend it! |
 | sent on February 24, 2013 Pros: Stabilizer, fast AF, price to be filled and hood included, reacts well even in dark places despite being a f/4-5.6. Cons: just a little bit soft at 300, but nothing to worry about ... Opinion: C one thing that bothered me a lot because it is a F/4.5-6 and many times I find myself taking pictures indoors without flash.rnI colors are surprisingly good and I have not detected any kind of distorsione.rnInsomma, would recommend to all! Worth much more than its price and its competitors Canon of the same series. |
 | sent on February 22, 2013 Pros: Price, Durability, Full-Time Manual Focus, stabilizer, 5 year warranty, Engine USD Cons: Soft full-aperture Opinion: I bought this lens for about 6 months, it's my first telephoto lens, the price is very good, € 330 new on Amazon, already see it gives the impression of being a perspective of a good standard, very solid and with good finishes. The ability to adjust the focus manually inserted even if the auto focus is really useful in some situations, the stabilizer does a good job. From what I could see from my shots, 300 mm aperture is closed from 8 to 11 to get a good sharpness at 5.6 is soft. Really is giving me a lot of satisfaction, I use it for macro photos (not having a specific optical) and gets along pretty well, allows you to stand at a distance of 1.50 to 1.80 meters by small subjects without getting too close to the running risk of them escape. The focus seems very good, fast focus and silent thanks to the ultrasonic motor. Another important thing is the guarantee of 5 years and is sold with the lens hood. The weight does not seem at all excessive. |
 | sent on February 03, 2013 Pros: Good price, good quality materials Cons: Autofocus often inaccurate, stabilzzatore a noisy Opinion: is great at the minimum focal 70mm up to 135mm even at maximum aperture, excellent F8 to get a little soft from 270mm to 300mm maximum focal length, unfortunately as I said in the other hand, in my example the focus is often inaccurate, but it is a defect I tried my copy to a friend of mine and the photos are all in perfect focus. rnTutto in all a good lens for those who do not want to spend troppo.anzi better not exist at this price. |
 | sent on December 21, 2012 Pros: Best of the best, fast and silent AF, stabilization, excellent, excellent image quality, high quality costruttivarnrn Cons: Could do it but would go out f4 fixed price. Therefore, no Opinion: Worth all the money spent to buy and even more. It 'very well built, and comes with a hood. The AF is fast and quiet, the stabilization is very good for their work, aberrations extremely compact, excellent colors, excellent sharpness and distortion practically absent up to 280mm. Becomes more than just a little softer but just something inaudible. They say that goes well with the kenko 1.4x DGX pro 300, which maintains the AF and all the information about the correct focal length. I'd like to try it. I highly recommend it to anyone looking to buy a 300mm without fainting. |
 | sent on November 21, 2012 Pros: Stabilizer very good, fast ultrasonic motor, value for money, lens hood, rugged construction, sharpness Cons: is a little pesantino Opinion: was and still is my first tele and almost immediately I was impressed, I never thought you could get such a result from a 70-300 zoom statement. Certainly much better than its competitor Canon that costs € 100 in più.rnL 'only thing I found is inconvenient to use this lens with a tripod, unfortunately not having the locking ring is a little pesantino to fix the machine on the head, but all in all it is a small thing. |
 | sent on October 25, 2012 Pros: AF fast, quiet and ultrasound, image quality, stabilizer GOOD, price, lens hood; Cons: 300 to lose quality .. recovers f / 8 but little Opinion: My second goal! VERY good price as well. are still a minor and not work so it is very hard to save money for a good lens, but this is perfect! Too bad for the loss of quality to 300mm ... : (Although for me it is equivalent to 450mm because I have the D3100 and does not have a full frame sensor .. rnRimane perspective Excellent! |
 | sent on October 20, 2012 Pros: Fast autofocus USD - Outstanding quality at all focal lengths - the stabilizer is a rock - sharpness - colors - petal-type hood high quality Cons: If I find one stabilizer a little noisy ... but who cares ... Opinion: The best first tele-lens for Canon L-series quality / price unbeatable sharpness suck, f / 4 is a tad soft but from f/5.6 to f/11 is a knife ... beautiful colors, good contrast, little PP thanks to these qualities ... USD fast autofocus, the stabilizer is a little noisy, but once activated, can also achieve 100dB noise because its effectiveness forgive all the noise that can make a real rock ... un'po pesantino (I like) but with a nice BG's all pretty balanced ... plastic hood but quality seems very solid. So for what it costs new, about 300 €, assolutissimamente recommend it to all, is a lens to have in the kit of every photographer, amateur or professional. I gave him 10 because it is the lens with the best quality / price ratio ever seen before. |
 | sent on October 11, 2012 Pros: Image quality, fast AF and quiet, excellent stabilizer, lens hood (Canon alarm clock!), Quality / price ratio Cons: Quite heavy, on entry level bodies tends to unbalance Opinion: Mounted on Canon APS-C, has a very good image quality (no AC note, good sharpness even at 300mm max aperture and excellent in half closed one stop), the AF with FTM is instantaneous and silent. The build quality is good: all plastic but high quality, metal clasps course. The zoom and focus rings are well used. Bello also petal-type hood with non-reflective coating. The stabilizer is noisy and nervous at the time of activation, but once running it seems to use the tripod so accurate. I think there is no other telephoto at that price again (280-340 €) of this quality. |
 | sent on October 03, 2012 Pros: Af very fast, ottimop stabilizer, good image quality, price, good construction and sturdy. Cons: a little heavy but for a 70 300 worth ..... Opinion: hello everyone I'm new to the forum, having the TAMRON 70 300 with excellent results, to me is worth all the money spent ... I see no difference with 70 300 IS USM canon which, as construction is a bit dated. someone can tell me something about the sp TAMRON 10 24 DI II LD, the initials SP objectives TAMRON know explain what it means thanks |
 | sent on August 12, 2012 Pros: effective stabilizer, autofocus quiet, good sharpness, reduced price. Cons: soft at 300, a little heavy, and no tripod ring Opinion: very good to start with, and as a second lens, it gives me enough trouble the lack of tripod mount ring for the rest I'm finding enough |
user12928 | sent on July 16, 2012 Pros: * Excellent sharpness bokeh * AF silently and quickly and accurately * very * well-balanced weight solid construction Cons: Stabilizer a little 'rumorisino (nothing so unfortunate), morbidello from 270mm up Opinion: If your wallet is crying and you want a telephoto lens that will do his duty in terms of sharpness, stabilization and bokeh. The above will do for you! It's really fun lens I really like for its speed, robustness and reliability. When I think that I paid 335 euros NEW in physical store, I still feel I have made an internal through eight! Great Wedding on 7D, and I can not wait to try it on the 5D Mark iii |
| sent on June 28, 2012 Pros: Quality / price, stabilizer, fast and quiet AF Cons: I could find no fault Opinion: Purchased in October 2011, used on several occasions, sports and photographic safari. Worth all the money spent (390 €), a great product for those who do not have money to spend, given the good construction. Not being a professional are not able to find defects to pictures taken as a good eye can catch the first time. I was a little hesitant to buy, but I quickly changed my mind. |
user12104 | sent on May 30, 2012 Pros: Fast AF, good detail even at 300mm, weight, price Cons: price, at least the one for Sony, because despite having no stabilizer costs the same versions with stabilizer. It has the feature that the other macro economic Tamron has more and that for me was very helpful. Opinion: My opinion is influenced by the fact that they have only owned the other 70/300 of the Tamron, the small of about 140 euro. rnLe sizes are good, as well as the weight, photos up to 300 mm are rich in detail (I septum opening at f8), I miss a field test that I will carry, and soon will complete the review of this objective that the first impressions almost excites me. Mean-field pictures outdoors in the countryside, birds. Used autofocus extremely slow small 70/300 this seems like a thunderbolt, but reading the various opinions on the subject is just fast. Quality seems robust even if it is plastic, but remember that it is a lens to be just over 300 euro. I also find it very luminoso.rnAdesso I changed brands (I took the Nikon D600) I have the Nikon version, repeat the previous sensations and add an opinion on the stabilizer, a little noisy but absolutely fantastic, practically stops the world! |
 | sent on May 11, 2012 Pros: Value / high price. Excellent sharpness up to 210mm. Good up to 270mm. Excellent stabilizer Cons: Rarely (1 out of 200 shots) focus when you get close to the minimum distance of fire if there is a good contrast busts. Morbino at room temperature up to 270mm. Opinion: I was lucky enough to have a gift that lens and now I'm impressed. The image quality is very high up to 270mm. At f / 8 to a maximum of itself. A 300mm should always keep it closed at f / 8 and, if possible, until af/11-f/13 improves again slightly. The defects are very few. This objective, for this range of use, it deserves a full 10. |
| sent on May 06, 2012 Pros: Very rugged, very good image quality, very effective stabilizer, autofocus fast, quiet and precise, relatively light price. Cons: stabilizer a tad bit noisy, a bit soft at 300mm at room temperature Opinion: It 's my first and only lens of home Tamron and I must say that I was pleasantly surprised: the 350 (or so) euro spent on this lens is a very low figure when you consider what it can offer. The feeling of strength as soon as it is removed from the boxes is amazing (even the hood gives the impression of being nice solid and durable), the zoom ring does not have games and offers the right amount of resistance. Once mounted on the machine surprising effectiveness of the stabilizer (to a first approach seemed a bit 'noisy, but it has never been a problem, especially because it plays very well his work) as well as the prowess of autofocus ( which has the convenient full time manual focus, which I have been able to benefit in some situations). The images obtained with this paintings are very good throughout the focal range, there is a slight decrease if you use at room temperature to the maximum focal length, defect, however minor and resolvable chiudento to 7.1. Last but not least, I really like the bokeh offered by this lens for all of these features, consider it a good buy. Every time I pull it out from the bag I think I was right to buy it and will replace it (maybe) when and if I decide to make the leap to move to the 100-400L. |
 | sent on May 03, 2012 Pros: Stabilizer phenomenal, good sharpness almost all focal lengths, autofocus good (not as USM Canon but still great) construction in relation to the price I would say excellent. Cons: Not yet received Opinion: This 70-300 is a really good lens, and has all the credentials to be the reference in this price range. Do not worries even his counterpart Canon as it costs at least € 100 more and I think it loses on all fronts (autofocus in the first place.) What can we say, the quality is excellent, it is certainly not perfect, has some aberration and 300 to TA is not just a knife but it is great if diaphragmed and again, for what it costs is really a best buy. Rated 9! |
 | sent on May 01, 2012 Pros: Good optical quality, low price, good construction, excellent stabilizer, lens hood, lightweight. Cons: Sometimes in low light or distant subjects takes a fraction of a second longer to focus on the subject. Sometimes blurs the maximum and then return to heat and this is wasting precious seconds. But we are talking about borderline cases. In normal conditions it is perfect. Opinion: Objective affordable with a value / price unbeatable. I use it for 10 months for hunting or traveling photographic stalking. I arrived to crop the images as much as 50% and if the shot was not done at high ISO and closed a little 'f/8.0 aperture is obtained, however, very beautiful photo and defined. Sure, 300mm is not enough for this type of use, but again, for what it costs is unrivaled as a lens "beginner". In addition to learning how to approach the birds is an excellent school: when the lens is short you need to work your brain and find new ways to reduce the distance to the subject! Highly recommended to all aspiring photographers. Putting away the pennies worth only change the focal length, to go to a 400mm or 500mm. At its end, in my personal judgment, has no major rivals. |
 | sent on April 08, 2012 Pros: Autofocus, stabilizer, construction, weight, lens hood supplied; price. Cons: Not received. Opinion: Purchased on offer in € 330, this lens already stunned when you pull out of the box: it is really well built, with no games and a weight (I consider this a pro) which helps to give a solid feel. When it is mounted on the machine then the urge not to remove more, the autofocus is very fast, discreet and stabilizer is phenomenal (with a little 'technique you can go down to 1/20 even at 300mm). Finally the image quality: very good, is worth at least double the price paid. That said, if you want a canvas with good quality without spending a fortune this is the lens for you. =) |
 | sent on March 16, 2012 Pros: Fast AF, Full Time MF, effective stabilizer, sharp even wide open from 70 to 300m, high-contrast images, excellent color, no AC, quality / price! Cons: had been a constant f4 would be the best ... rnleggera vignetting at TA FF, but on APS-c no black border! rn Opinion: abandoned prejudices on optical non-Canon / Nikon or other ... this lens, in my opinion, is fantastic! rnL'ho purchased to replace the canon 70-200mm f4 L non-stabilized, in order to take advantage of those 300mm and stabilizer that I needed and I do not regret, indeed, I am thrilled! RNLA :) I'm using a 500D and a 5D old, with excellent results; RNA these focal lengths, the stabilizer is important and this is very efficient Tamron VC: I shot with the 5D at 300mm f5, 6 to getting 1/30s excellent picture, with a slight vignettattura that of Aps-c is not visible! rnL'Af is very fast, as much as a USM canon, quiet and precise, in a word: efficiente.rnNitido to 70mm to 300mm as even at full aperture with a very nice contrast and excellent color ... Well controlled AC! RnChe mean, if this point would cost twice as much, I would have praised and purchased anyway, but pay only 350 € is really a pleasure!! My vote is a full 9! highly recommended! ; A |
| sent on March 09, 2012 Pros: Accurate, well balanced, excellent image quality. Cons: Stabilizer slightly noisy. Opinion: I guess that's a good quality of construction and quality is the price I think it is very competitive in the range of 70- 300 I got to try the nikon and honestly I have not found anything so different both in quality and in the photo, even from 180 300mm to think much more clear and well-made of light and color the tamron. On the market today have these niches quality with good prices without having to embark on expenses ecessive the possibility to play more and more. I believe that the photographic market has made huge progress and is no longer rotating only around the major brands rather think that the opposite happens. GOOD LIGHT TO ALL. |
 | sent on March 03, 2012 Pros: Best of the best, fast and silent AF, stabilization, excellent, excellent image quality, good build quality Cons: A soft wire to 300mm. Opinion: Worth all the money spent to buy and even more. It 'very well built, and comes with a hood. The AF is fast and quiet, the stabilization does its job very well, extremely small aberrations, good colors, good sharpness and virtually no distortion to over 200mm. Becomes more than just a little softer. Perfectly compatible with the multiplier kenko 1.4x DGX pro 300, maintains the AF and all the information about the correct focal length. I highly recommend it to anyone looking to buy a 300mm without a mortgage. |
 | sent on November 24, 2011 Pros: Excellent image quality, affordable price, fast autofocus, image stabilization surprisingly great. Cons: Slightly heavy, but it's a 70-300 Opinion: The most appropriate adjective for this is certainly surprising. At that price anyone imagine what it is able to do. The quality is excellent, the stabilizer works great, autofocus is fast and perfect. C'erto is not an f/2.8, but if you do not need to remove the background so that is something incredible. It works well without losing the automatic with the multiplier! I recommend it to everybody, beginners and even pro ... Oh, and also won the TIPA Awards 2011, such as millet lens in its class. |
 | sent on October 20, 2011 Pros: Af fast enough and quiet - the motor fast usd is, I would say good stabilization - that good quality immagie + - accessibilissimo price - very well built - lens - teleconverter Cons: so far no one, is worth all the money spent .. Opinion: Even I was surprised more than anything stabilizer, comparable if not superior to that of the canon 70-300 Is - the price and quality construction make this point really good for those who do not want to spend big bucks but cmq looking for a teezoom well executed. Rated 8 in general, and A + + for the stabilizer. ps: just arrived the teleconverter kenko DGX 1.4x pro 300 and it works great and also keeps me both autofocus and stabilization ... which I thought did not happen ...! ABSOLUTELY RECOMMENDED. |
 | sent on September 29, 2011 Pros: AF fast and silent ultrasonic, very good image quality, exceptional stabilizer, even for Full Frame, price, lens hood, good construction Cons: A bit 'heavier than the competition Opinion: I think it really worth to buy this canvas. What surprised me is the stabilizer: a 300mm long shot with 1/20 being very firm without getting blur. The AF is quiet and fast enough. The price is great (more than 150 € less than the Canon with very good performance). Aberrations are really very small and there is no presence of distortions. The materials used are good, you feel the strength to touch. I can recommend it to everyone who wants focal lengths without spending impossible. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
