Tamron AF 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 XR Di A-mount lens reviews
reviews found: 14
 QuietOC#44478 date: Mar-14-2020 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 18-135 F3.5-5.6 SAM Sony DT 18-200 F3.5-6.3 Tamron 18-250 F3.5-6.3 Minolta AF 24-105 F3.5-4.5 D Minolta AF 28-100 F3.5-5.6 D Sigma AF 28-105 F2.8-4 Canon EF 28-105 F3.5-4.5 USM II Minolta AF 28-105 F3.5-4.5 & RS & Xi Minolta AF 28-135 F4-4.5 Tamron 28-200 F3.8-5.6 LD Tamron 28-300 F3.5-6.3 XR Minolta AF 35-105 F3.5-4.5/New Sigma AF 35-135 F3.5-4.5 Minolta AF 35-200 F4.5-5.6 Xi Tokina AF 35-200 F4-5.6 SD Tokina AF 35-300 F4.5-6.7 Minolta MD 50-135 F3.5 Minolta AF 70-210 F4 Minolta AF 70-210 F3.5-4.5 Minolta AF 70-210 F4.5-5.6 I/II |
| price paid: | 106 USD (used) |
| positive: | Light Compact zoomed out Good corners Distance encoder 62 mm filter thread |
| negative: | Variation Alignment at long end |
| comment: | I returned the older pre-Di version and made an offer for this lens from a reliable eBay store. This is another clean copy with original hood and both caps. The rubber is more discolored from use, which I generally take as a positive sign. It has the same strange metal/plastic hybrid mount as the earlier version. This lens was discontinued in 2014 when replaced by the larger, heavier PZD lens. "MADE IN JAPAN" This lens has much better image quality than the older, heavier 28-200mm LD. This lens also suffers alignment issues when zoomed in. Supporting the front of barrel helps. I am giving a build rating of 3. I am not sure if this is a manufacturing defect or caused by wear. The similar APS-C 18-250mm zoom didn't have this problem. I tried another copy that had even worse alignment. |
; 20MP| Ascor#20399 date: Oct-28-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron AF 28-75 2.8 Sigma AF 70-300 4-5.6 Minolta AF 70-210 4.0 ...and lots of other vintage glass |
| price paid: | 150€ (used) |
| positive: | Quite sharp in the center |
| negative: | Noisy AF |
| comment: | In the past few years i tried every superzoom i could get my hands on, first on Nikon APS-C, later on Sony APS-C, now on fullframe. I didn't like most of them and found only two above average: The Nikkor 18-200 VR2 on a D7000 and a Sigma 18-200 DC OS HSM2 on a A77. Neither was perfect, but they were capable allrounders. I didn't dare to hope for another good one on my A7r but luckily Tamron came to my rescue. The 28-300 is reasonably sharp in the middle of the frame, across the whole range and even wide open - and thats very (!) unusual for a superzoom like this. Stopping down to f8 improves the IQ further. In the 70-300 range it isn't quite as sharp as the astonishing Sigma 70-300 I compared it to, but it comes close. I don't like the noisy AF, but the LA-EA4 adapter does a good job focusing. I will keep this lens as my new allrounder. |
| Johnc#9515 date: Oct-20-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 28-105 F3.5-4.5 Sigma AF 28-135 F3.8-5.6 Asp IF Macro Tamron AF 28-200 F3.8-5.6 XR Asp IF Minolta AF 35-105 F3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 200 |
| positive: | Great range for one lens Sharp at f8 Small, light & compact Great general purpose walk about lens |
| negative: | Zomm ring very stiff, but no creep AF can hunt a lot in low light 300 is not 300, maybe 270 at best |
| comment: | This is a very good all purpose lens & I like it a lot. It is great for all general purpose outdoor stuff. Wide angle for landscape is reasonable and is good and sharp below 200m. A little soft after 250mm but overall, good bang for the buck. Will be my outdoor holiday lens. Colour of the Minolta AF 35-105 still tops but this is a very good second with extra zoom. |
| derekw#9346 date: Aug-19-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 75-300 (Big beercan) Minolta 35-105 (original) Minolta 24-85 RS |
| price paid: | 99 GBP |
| positive: | Gharpness Colour Solid Build 62mm filters Range Close focussing Full frame |
| negative: | Maximum aperture AF hunts in low light |
| comment: | Surprisingly it out performs the Big Beercan @ 300 f6.3. Great all purpose lens which only needs stopping down a touch for very good sharpness. Outperformed by the 35-105 but is pretty close to the others and I purposely gave the lens stiff opposition. For the money a great all purpose option for everyday photography. |
| dumbasadoorknob#9231 date: Jul-12-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 28135 Sony 70300G |
| price paid: | 140 usd used |
| positive: | small light zoom lock inexpensive useful |
| negative: | plastic breakable |
| comment: | My copy of this lens is better, in every way, than my copy of the Min 28135 -- but it is inferior to the 70300g -- except that it is an entire magnitude of size smaller, lighter, more portable. It fits in my pocket! I bought my copy as a replacement when my son's copy bounced and needed repair. So it's not a really solid lens. But his copy was repaired (for almost as little as I paid for my new copy) and I stuck it in a drawer. I thought "ugh, superzoom, super bad." Then I stumbled on an old Tokina 28-200, a heavyweight version of the Min28135. It too wasn't really satisfactory -- and I pulled this lens out of the drawer. It's a perfect travel lens. It's image quality is not as good as the 35105, but it's almost as good, and it's three times the zoom ratio. The colors are better than normal Tamron, and acceptable to a Minolta color maven such as I think am. It has a sacrificial lens hood ( a bit small) and a zoom lock, and inexpensive 62mm filters, and a non-turning front lens. It is the perfect lens to show how good Sony/Minolta's inbody antishake is. It's a little slow in zooming, and the zoom ring is stiff -- and it's a little slow in autofocus and lacks a focus hold or focus limiting button. The camera identifies its zoom length wrong at the short end, which is a common problem in reverse engineered lenses by Tamron. It's so inexpensive on the web that it's almost a disposable lens, but it is surprisingly good. I recently thought of buying a Tamron or Sigma 24135 because of my dissatisfaction with my Min 28135 -- but I stopped that fantasy after I began playing with this lens. It serves my purposes better than they. It's not a prime; it's not a G zoom. I live in sunny Southern California so there's always ample light -- but this lens is good, and it's an awful lot better than my view of superzooms has been. |
| Grrrowl#8616 date: Feb-5-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | £199 |
| positive: | Great range for one lens Sharp @ f8 Small & Compact Great general purpose walk about lens |
| negative: | AF can hunt a lot in low light MF difficult with limited focusing ring |
| comment: | I like this lens a lot, its great for keeping on the camera for general purpose photography. Reasonable wide angle for landscape and has a nice sharpness for portrait images. Little soft after 250mm but for the money a really good lens. |
| pagespix#6085 date: Sep-19-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 70-210/4, 28-85 /3.5~4.5, 100-200/4.5, 75-300/4.5~5.6 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Light Weight, Compact, Focal Range, Sharpness, Macro capability, excellent outdoor lens. |
| negative: | Hunting / slow to focus, Horrible Macro Focus, Loose manual focus, Not a true 300mm? |
| comment: | This is the best all purpose lens in my bag. Either I got a good copy or this is a great lens. First the good: When it focuses it's dead on. It's range and size make it the perfect lens for a day trip or when you want to only carry one lens. Macro pictures need to be manually focused, but come out sharp. Build quality, this is not a 'plastic feeling lens' as someone suggested. This lens is mostly metal and feels like it. The zoom ring is smooth. The Bad: NOT a low light lens. Slow to focus/hunting.(Once the lens does focus, it's tight except for macro shots.) Some play in the focus ring(could just be mine.) Says it's 300mm, but compared to a minolta and sigma 300mm lens, does not compare right, this lens looks like it tops out in the 280s. This is a great one lens solution. It has all the range you need for a day out at a zoo, park, bird watching or hiking. The weight makes it all day friendly when your tired of carrying a bag full of lenses. This is not a lens to bring to an indoor party, unless there is a lot of light or you have plenty of time to focus. I do a lot of hiking and this lens is the best for that. Auto focus works terrible on macro, and the manual focus ring is tough to get 'just right', but when you do the results are impressive. Lastly, the sharpness in the top end does soften slightly, but on par with other zoom lenses in this range. |
| DarkScribe#5732 date: Jul-20-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 2.5 color: 2 build: 1 distortion: 2 flare control: 2 overall: 1.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 75-300, Minolta 75-300 (Big Beercan) Sigma 70-300 DL Macro |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Very little that can be regarded as positive other than the low new price. It is a poor performer that it is clearly outclassed by Sony's 75-300 kit lens. |
| negative: | Wobbly plastic construction, in any but bright light it is prone to hunt when trying o focus, soft at all focal lengths, attracts CA, colours not good. |
| comment: | I can't understand how anybody has reviewed this lens well - I can only assume that they are novices who have experienced nothing but a low zoom kit lens. I have looked at two copies, owned one (purchased in a bulk buy) and both are the same. It was cheap to buy when new, less than the Sony kit lens and performs worse than any other xx - 300 that I have ever used. It is plastic junk. |
| jakubh70#4236 date: Oct-14-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 18-250 DiII Sigma 28-300, 70-300 APO, DG, APO DG, Minolta 100-300 APO, Minolta 75-300 New |
| price paid: | 200 GBP |
| positive: | Good sharpness, acceptable AF speed, 1:2,9 macro, best 28-300 ultrazoom I had. |
| negative: | Nothing special for ultrazoom lens... |
| comment: | Seems that my copy was the best one I could get. It was amazingly sharp throughout the range from F5,6-6,3 on, even at 300mm, being sharper than mentioned xx-300mm APO lenses above. At F8/300mm was as sharp as Minolta APO 100-300 at F8/210mm. Amazing? Yes, at least for me. Only 75-300 New was sharper, but with a lot more CA. From the other hand it was soft at F3,5-F4 apertures at wide end, but stopping down to F5,6-F8 helped to take excellent sharpness also here, apart of corners where some CA appeared. Beyond wide range CA was alomost invisible. AF works fast enough, much faster than in 18-250 and more precisely than in Sigma's. One can say 6,3/300 is slow, but I like better sharp 6,3/300 than soft 5,6/300, that gives acceptable results when stopped down to 11/300, what was my 70-300 Sigma's and Minolta APO problem. Last but not least - usable semi-macro mode, due to internal focusing this lens at 300mm zoom position and 0,5 m from object becomes ~150mm telemacro, achieving 1/2,9x ratio. I have also Tamron 18-250 that is sharp from wide end wide open, but not so sharp over 150mm. I keep it as more usable for A700. |
| Bossie#1193 date: Sep-16-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | sigma 28-300 , older tamron 28-200 and 300 lenses |
| price paid: | 180 € on ebay (used) |
| positive: | Best zoom lens in this range I ever had . Sharp up to 220mm. Quite small |
| negative: | Worse build quality then older models . Not sharp on the long end |
| comment: | It's my first zoom lens in this range which produces acceptable pictures |
| Skydragoness#1029 date: Jul-16-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Relatively fast AF |
| negative: | AF hunts a lot in low light. |
| comment: | My first lens for the 5D, it has been extremely useful when going to horse shows and motorsports events. The AF could be faster, but its not that shabby. I use it primarily for outdoor photography. Here's an example of some high-speed shots I took: http://nissaninfiniticlub.net/photopost/data/500/19623MAdrift.jpg http://nissaninfiniticlub.net/photopost/data/500/19623DriftpeopleS14.jpg Lots of cropping were involved because of a chain-link fence that was in the way (that was wreaking havoc w/ the AF but I managed). |
| hiryu#587 date: Mar-15-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Very wide zoom range, very good price |
| negative: | Slow focusing spped indoor, Hunts for focus or is unable to focus in darker condition |
| comment: | Very good outdoor lens. |
| aarif#213 date: Nov-12-2005 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Covers a very big range and that is very useful for traveling. very sharp under 200mm. |
| negative: | Slow AF hunts a lot specially indoors and it’s significantly softer at 300 |
| comment: | If you’re on a tide budget or like to travel light this is a good lens to have. |
| filipcharvey#99 date: Aug-6-2005 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Nice wide range 42-450 mm on 7D , Good quality Price |
| negative: | Manual focus not easy because too short ring range, rather usable in outdoor application , too dark for shot indoor without flash |
| comment: | Works very very well on my 7D , some back focus in low light, normal for this type of lense ! |
reviews found: 14
rating summary
- total reviews: 14
- sharpness: 4.11
- color: 4.21
- build: 3.64
- distortion: 3.93
- flare control: 4.00
- overall: 3.98
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login