|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Technical Details
- This lens is suitable for Nikon D40, D40x & D60 DSLR
- This lens will work on Auto-Focus mode
Product details
|
Related Items
- Most Popular
- Photography Filters
- Camera Bags & Cases
- Digital Cameras
- Camera Lens Hoods
- Flashes
Product Description
Manufacturer's Description
Tamron now offers a lightweight, compact, high-image-quality telephoto zoom lens with macro capability of 1: 2 that can be used with digital cameras. This lens is a Di type lens using an optical system with improved multi-coating designed to function with digital SLR cameras as well as film cameras.With this 70-300mm telephoto zoom lens, flipping a macro switch in the focal length range of 180mm to 300mm obtains a maximum magnification ratio of 1: 2 at a minimum focus distance as short as 37.4", enabling close-up shots of flowers, insects, and other objects that normally require the use of a specially designed macro lens. Moreover, this is a zoom lens that casually offers the distant capture and foreshortening effect pleasures of the 300mm ultra-telephoto world.
Product Description
Tamron LD 4,0-5,6/70-300 DI N/AF for Nikon Neu
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
13 of 13 people found the following review helpful
It was with some trepidation that I bought this lens; some of the reviews I've read for the lens are not that positive. I decided to buy the lens anyway as I had a good deal on it. I've had it for about two weeks now and I'm pretty happy with it. On the positive side I've found the macro works pretty well. On a tripod and taking shots of objects at distance the colour and sharpness are pretty acceptable. The major weakness is the dopey auto focus in anything less than a good light. Even in a good light rapid panning causes the lens to hunt. So I wouldn't recommend this lens if you're trying to capture action shots. Overall I think the lens represents pretty good value for the money. Just don't expect to capture a 100m sprint final!
16 of 17 people found the following review helpful
I was on a budget so after reading several positive reviews I decided to go for this lens. Prior to this I had been using the 18-55 VR kit lens that comes with the Nikon D3100. Now for the price I wasn't expecting it to be great - and again this may be unfair because I am comparing the image quality to a Nikkor lens, but the difference in image quality was really quite a shock.
At higher ISOs and shutter speeds the image was crisp but at lower speeds the absence of VR is easily noticeable. If you're using a tripod I imagine the lens would be very workable but I don't think I could comfortably use it for hand held shots - and I like to believe I have a steady hand.
The auto-focus does search quite significantly. Some shots were just not possible to take using it. The macro switch is also a little fiddly so you should be careful when using it as it could be damaged.
The build is nice though and definitely looks impressive on a body, plus there is a free lens hood which is nice. It's not too heavy - I barely noticed the difference between that and my kit lens - and zooming and focusing manually is very comfortable (if not just a little stiff).
If you are just taking casual photos that you have no intention of printing in large formats, I'd say the lens is fine, however if you do I would say it's worth spending a bit more and giving up 80mm to go for the Nikkor 55-200 lens instead. If you can afford it you might as well go for the 55-300 lens. It also has VR and for just an extra £70 it is bound to be worth the investment as I'm sure the extra reach will be desired sooner or later.
But for the lens, let's just say this is a generous 3. An off the record 4.
At higher ISOs and shutter speeds the image was crisp but at lower speeds the absence of VR is easily noticeable. If you're using a tripod I imagine the lens would be very workable but I don't think I could comfortably use it for hand held shots - and I like to believe I have a steady hand.
The auto-focus does search quite significantly. Some shots were just not possible to take using it. The macro switch is also a little fiddly so you should be careful when using it as it could be damaged.
The build is nice though and definitely looks impressive on a body, plus there is a free lens hood which is nice. It's not too heavy - I barely noticed the difference between that and my kit lens - and zooming and focusing manually is very comfortable (if not just a little stiff).
If you are just taking casual photos that you have no intention of printing in large formats, I'd say the lens is fine, however if you do I would say it's worth spending a bit more and giving up 80mm to go for the Nikkor 55-200 lens instead. If you can afford it you might as well go for the 55-300 lens. It also has VR and for just an extra £70 it is bound to be worth the investment as I'm sure the extra reach will be desired sooner or later.
But for the lens, let's just say this is a generous 3. An off the record 4.
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Tamron, back in the '80's and 90's so dominated the indie telezoom market, with their Adaptall 80-210mm f3.8-4, which at a good price, almost uniquely, actually delivered a quality that was usable at any setting, including wide open at the long end. It sold in its 100,000's, if not more.
Times have moved on and zoom ranges extended, as are us photographer's expectations. 70-300mm is now the basic norm, with some sort of close focus a feature many hobbyists look out for, as an added bonus.
As a semi pro, using the full-frame Nikon D700, I only had reason to try one of these dinky lightweight lenses whilst waiting for an insurance claim on a broken, much more pricey Nikon equivalent. The cost then, on special offer, was little more than the Excess that insurance claim incurred! I now use as my telezoom standard Tamron's flagship model, their Vibration Control, Ultrasonic Motor A/F Superior Performance, at nearly three times the price.
Yes, there are differences, but not so big as perhaps one would imagine and shots I'd taken with the cheaper lens at London Zoo, for example are not wanting in any department. It uses (so I am informed) high grade plastics for some of the elements - glass is heavy - and why not? My spectacle lenses are plastic! This keeps the weight down and probably the cost too.
Up to about 200mm, it is bitingly sharp, with high contrast and pincushion distortion (straight lines at frame edges bowing inwards) fairly well controlled. My much heavier Tamron is market-leading in this respect but for most, and for most subjects, the cheaper lens won't disappoint.
At 300mm, yes, the images are fairly soft but good contrast still produces pleasing images. If you want to enlarge to A3, from a shot taken at 300mm, you might be disappointed, whereas A4 should be fine. I haven't used a 'cheap' Nikon lens of this spec, though even expensive ones aren't so brilliant either and my flagship Tamron beats them in any case - in my experience).
I do recall the macro 'feature' as being useful (though I own a specialist macro - another Tamron!, the 90mm f2.8) so I didn't rely on this but I did try it out. Image quality was actually very good, especially for flowers and natural things. Yes, the switching to - and from - was a bit fiddly and made it impossible to track, say a butterfly, if it flew out of the macro's zone of focus.
But, on the basis of value/features/spec/quality, in roughly that order, then how can I not award four stars? It got me out of a jam and I keep on finding images that I'd taken with it and for the large part are they are indecipherable from the others, unless one really zooms right in and examines 'actual pixels' on a big computer screen.
For those on a budget, or those whose first telezoom this is and don't want to make an expensive mistake then this dinky Tamron comes quite highly recommended; by someone who still has one of those old 80-210mm Tamrons from thirty years ago! (- which I no longer use, I have to add.....)
Times have moved on and zoom ranges extended, as are us photographer's expectations. 70-300mm is now the basic norm, with some sort of close focus a feature many hobbyists look out for, as an added bonus.
As a semi pro, using the full-frame Nikon D700, I only had reason to try one of these dinky lightweight lenses whilst waiting for an insurance claim on a broken, much more pricey Nikon equivalent. The cost then, on special offer, was little more than the Excess that insurance claim incurred! I now use as my telezoom standard Tamron's flagship model, their Vibration Control, Ultrasonic Motor A/F Superior Performance, at nearly three times the price.
Yes, there are differences, but not so big as perhaps one would imagine and shots I'd taken with the cheaper lens at London Zoo, for example are not wanting in any department. It uses (so I am informed) high grade plastics for some of the elements - glass is heavy - and why not? My spectacle lenses are plastic! This keeps the weight down and probably the cost too.
Up to about 200mm, it is bitingly sharp, with high contrast and pincushion distortion (straight lines at frame edges bowing inwards) fairly well controlled. My much heavier Tamron is market-leading in this respect but for most, and for most subjects, the cheaper lens won't disappoint.
At 300mm, yes, the images are fairly soft but good contrast still produces pleasing images. If you want to enlarge to A3, from a shot taken at 300mm, you might be disappointed, whereas A4 should be fine. I haven't used a 'cheap' Nikon lens of this spec, though even expensive ones aren't so brilliant either and my flagship Tamron beats them in any case - in my experience).
I do recall the macro 'feature' as being useful (though I own a specialist macro - another Tamron!, the 90mm f2.8) so I didn't rely on this but I did try it out. Image quality was actually very good, especially for flowers and natural things. Yes, the switching to - and from - was a bit fiddly and made it impossible to track, say a butterfly, if it flew out of the macro's zone of focus.
But, on the basis of value/features/spec/quality, in roughly that order, then how can I not award four stars? It got me out of a jam and I keep on finding images that I'd taken with it and for the large part are they are indecipherable from the others, unless one really zooms right in and examines 'actual pixels' on a big computer screen.
For those on a budget, or those whose first telezoom this is and don't want to make an expensive mistake then this dinky Tamron comes quite highly recommended; by someone who still has one of those old 80-210mm Tamrons from thirty years ago! (- which I no longer use, I have to add.....)
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Most Recent Customer Reviews
Value for money!
Even alongside lenses costing a lot more, this Tamron 70-300 performs well. OK it's the budget version without the anti-shake bells and whistles, but don't let that deter you. Read more
Published 1 month ago by Mikko Kettu
Excellent product
I was slightly dubious about buying a non-Nikon AF lens for use with my D3100 camera, but I am pleased to say that the Tamron AF 70-300mm works perfectly, and is considerably... Read more
Published 2 months ago by Othen
Great budget lens
Fab lens on a budget, especially for an amateur photographer. Would recommend to anyone that is interested in taking photographs long distance as a second lens!
Published 7 months ago by Rachael Priddle
Super
I love my lens, still getting used to it but have no complaints. I have already taken some good stills and sport shots. As a purely hobby photographer this fits my bill.
Published 7 months ago by Rools
Tamron lens for Nikon
This lens does the job expected of it, with no frills. Focusses accurately (manually of course), both in 'macro' mode and to infinity.Good value for money.
Published 7 months ago by Mr. Philip Terry
advice please
Could any one please advice me if the Tomron AF-70-300mm would suit my new nikon d3000. Im just a novice and getting used to my first lsr.
Many thanks Lynn
Many thanks Lynn
Published 9 months ago by lino111
Thumbs up!
this arrived 5 days earlier than expected!
Pretty awesome lens if youre on a budget. It has a nice feel to it, and looks nice. Read more
Pretty awesome lens if youre on a budget. It has a nice feel to it, and looks nice. Read more
Published 9 months ago by Lauren Amy Twynham
I am GLAD
Well here it goes,
If you are like me a beginner to the photography and not sure about things...... read on .. Read more
If you are like me a beginner to the photography and not sure about things...... read on .. Read more
Published 9 months ago by B. Ozcan
this lens paired with D7000
A budget lens for the amature photographer i bought this lens to go with my new D7000 ,On opening this lens i was suprised at its good build quality and it does look the shiz on... Read more
Published 10 months ago by Mr. John Mcgartland
great shots using with a tripod
I bought the lens few weeks back and tried it once, all I can say is a decent quality pictures if used with a tripod. Read more
Published 10 months ago by RonC
Customer Discussions
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/02/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192198663_.gif){kind=small}
Listmania!
|
|
Look for similar items by category
|
