Man maths - Replacing two lenses for a Tamron 18-270mm

[eltawater]

Howdo,
I'm starting to find it a bit of a chore swopping between the 18-55mm kit lens and the 55-200mm af-s lens on the D3100.

With that in mind, I've been eyeing up the Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC which I believe comes with the necessary focus motor built in. The intention would be to sell the kit lens and the 55-200 to fund the Tamron, as I'd quite like the additional focal length and Macro features too.

Now man maths is telling me that if the Tamron can be had 2nd hand on ebay for 320, then assuming I can fetch 60 for the kit and 90 for the 55-200mm, cost to change is a more reasonable 170 pounds.

Does anyone have any experience of this Tamron lens, and is it reasonable for image quality compared to the kit lens? I will be looking to pair it with an AF-S 35mm prime, so don't have huge concerns at that focal range.

Thanks in advance

[ChipsAndCheese]

I have been using this lens quite a bit of late. It has become the lens I leave on my D5100 most of the time for the reasons you mention - saves having to keep swapping lenses.

It seems to be a decent enough lens. The VC vibration control is excellent on it (though noisy - focus is also quite noisy), and it's nice to have the wide range of focal lengths. I have noticed a little bit of vignetting creeping in on some pictures, though I don't know if this is a problem with this lens in general or just mine (I didn't buy mine, it's on long term loan from a family member who didn't want it and he doesn't take the best care of his photography gear. It could be that the vignetting on my lens is a result of this).

I have some example pictures from this lens on my flickr account.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/76766156@N06/tags/tam...

Edited by ChipsAndCheese on Friday 15th June 17:56

[5hero]

Your man maths is incorrect, OP. Surely you need a second body for the other lens?

Can't comment on the lens though, I'm sure others can!

[Xaero]

I used to have it on my old Canon 500d. I found it heavy (I got the original one, I believe the new one is 100g lighter and less bulky), but enjoyed the convenience of it. Image quality was good, but the auto focus was a bit slow, especially in low light. That's the biggest disadvantage from memory.

[Dogsey]

This is something I don't understand, why go to the expense and inconvenience of buying and lugging around an SLR if changing lenses is too much hassle? I not having a dig at the OP here, this type of topic has come up a fair few times in here over the years and I just genuinely don't understand the reasoning behind this.

[Rich K]

I've had this as a main lens on my D7000 for over a year now, its a great all-rounder. and with the cropped sensor relates to 27 - 405 in 35mm terms

I'm sure its not up there with the dedicated lenses and far as picture quality is concerned but for me its almost ideal as a keen amateur.

As previously mentioned some vignetting can occur, what I do find annoying is that when the camera is facing downwards the lens zoom will creep out, sometimes quickly to maximum. twisting the lens to zoom back out its met by a resistance that can only be overcome by holding the camera or upright (horizontal gather than vertical)

The image stabilisation works very well enought to gain a coulpe of stops.
which is great as it isn't the fastest lens in the world.

I hoped that with fewer lens changes I would eliminate dirt getting on to the camera sensor.
Beware that the lens isnt air tight and moves a lot of air inside when going from max to min zoom.
This is the first time I have experienced dirt on my sensor (is it the lens?)

I would happliy reccomend this lens, If mine needed replacing I would buy the same again

[Pints]

Dogsey said:

This is something I don't understand, why go to the expense and inconvenience of buying and lugging around an SLR if changing lenses is too much hassle? I not having a dig at the OP here, this type of topic has come up a fair few times in here over the years and I just genuinely don't understand the reasoning behind this.

Agreed.

I'm not fortunate enough to be allowed a DSLR but I change lenses (telephoto or wide-angle) on my Canon S3 bridge camera more often than I'd guess many SLR owners change their lenses.

Surely the two individual lenses (18-55 and 55-200) will offer better options and ultimately better pics than a single Tamron will?

Edited by Pints on Saturday 16th June 09:06

[Rich K]

Pints said:

Dogsey said:

This is something I don't understand, why go to the expense and inconvenience of buying and lugging around an SLR if changing lenses is too much hassle? I not having a dig at the OP here, this type of topic has come up a fair few times in here over the years and I just genuinely don't understand the reasoning behind this.

Agreed.

I'm not fortunate enough to be allowed a DSLR but I change lenses (telephoto or wide-angle) on my Canon S3 bridge camera more often than I'd guess many SLR owners change their lenses.

Surely the two individual lenses will offer better options and ultimately better pics than a single Tamron will?

for me its a blend of convenience and control
I spend many hours travelling and the camera is never far away, so I know I will always have the "right" lens available instantly.

I've just bought a Leica Vlux-40 that has a 24 - 480 optical zoom
this might be the ideal travel companion, but there is nothing to match the feel of a substantial camera body, viewfinder and lens when taking a photo.
It just feels right, your stance and position just feels more sturdy than when using a compact.

The controls of an DSLR are also much more to hand, with many at your fingertips.
I just cant become as one with a compact where as the DSLR seems more a part of me.

the DSLR is the drivers car of the camera world

[Dogsey]

Rich K said:

The DSLR is the drivers car of the camera world.

Now that I understand, except that leaving one lens on is like buying an automatic MX5 with a diesel engine.

[Rich K]

Dogsey said:

Now that I understand, except that leaving one lens on is like buying an automatic MX5 with a diesel engine.

[ChipsAndCheese]

Dogsey said:

This is something I don't understand, why go to the expense and inconvenience of buying and lugging around an SLR if changing lenses is too much hassle? I not having a dig at the OP here, this type of topic has come up a fair few times in here over the years and I just genuinely don't understand the reasoning behind this.

I like being able to swap lenses and use the best lens for the situation, but there are times when it is just not practical or convenient, or you may just not want to carry your other lenses with you somewhere. But I still want to use my DSLR for all of the control it gives over shots - I have no problem with walking around with it around my neck as it is always to hand whenever I want to take a shot. It's times like this when it is good to have a lens like the 18-270 in your kit bag. This way you get the best of both worlds.

I still swap to my other lenses a lot, so personally, I wouldn't get rid them and replace them with a 'one for all occasions' lens, but it is handy to have one in your collection.

[midgeman]

Theres been a thread about this lens before I think? I use one as a walkabout type, just leave it on my 60D and love it

[james_tigerwoods]

I have a D3100 and a 55-200 and a 35mm 1.8 - however, I use an 18-70 over the 18-55 and don't feel the need for much else. If I were to go for an "all in 1 lens", I'd look at the new 18-300 - let your man-maths go nuts on that one...

However, wouldn't you find it heavy to use as a "leave on lens"? Me, I leave on the 35mm as it's so much better than anything I've got - I just swap the lens to the 18-70 if I need to which isn't that often.

[eltawater]

Thank you to everyone for their advice, especially chipsAndCheese. Those photos look really good and have allayed any fears I might have had.

As others have said, I like the control which a DSLR gives me over a compact and having the option to switch to other lenses. However, I'm very much an impulse shot taker on walkabout which means it's particularly annoying when I find I've got the wrong lens attached. More often than not, by the time I've unscrewed one lens, swopped lens caps and re-mounted the desired lens, the moment has passed. The OCDness over getting dirt on the lens/sensor whilst juggling in the field just makes things worse.

As neither the kit nor the 55-200 are particularly outstanding lenses, I feel that if there's a product out there that can perform both jobs to an equal or better standard, then the man maths pull is too strong to resist.

A little birdie tells me that I'm going to be acquiring a 35mm prime in the next week, so I'm going to be combining the Tamron with that.

Now then. Anyone want to buy a 3 month old kit lens and a 55-200mm?

[Irrotational]

I am a one lenser...I got the camera to take photos of my kids...they refuse to stay still and, at best, will smile for approximately 1/60th of a second.

I needed a camera that would take pictures instantly...I do use other features and like fking about, but that is pretty much the whole reason I have a dslr rather than my phone camera....

For the same reason, I need a 1 lens solution...

HTH

[dibbly dobbler]

OP - apologies if I am going over old ground here but just to check that you know there are two versions of this lens see here.

I have the newer PZD version and it's very, very good - at its best with at least one stop on top of wide open but if you can live with that then it's sharp