Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Tamron 18-270 PZD

profile picture
snowisawesome
Posts: 447 - Karma: 76
Hey guys, I'm looking at purchasing this lens for my Nikon D7000.  Anyone have anything to say about this lens?

I shoot about 60%video and 40% photos.  I just need something that covers about 20-35mm - 250-300mm and this lens looked like one of the better all-in-one zooms for the price.  I have a 18-85 and a 70-300 but my 70-300 isn't IF which sucks when using a polarizer and 70mm is a bit too tight for some shots/scenarios for hunting/fly fishing.
Jul 20 2012 1:29PM
0 0
profile picture
oil.
Posts: 2255 - Karma: 1,254
blah
Jul 20 2012 2:18PM
0 0
profile picture
snowisawesome
Posts: 447 - Karma: 76
I know it's not going to be the sharpest lens but I haven't read anything terrible about it.  What would be a better option for a zoom lens in this range?
Jul 20 2012 2:40PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61604 - Karma: 123,113
it cost 400 bucks for a reason... its a terrible lens. please dont get it
Jul 20 2012 2:47PM
0 0
profile picture
snowisawesome
Posts: 447 - Karma: 76
Would you say the Tamron 28-300 is better or worse than the 18-270?  Honestly, I don't think either would be as bad of a lens as many would like to say.
Jul 20 2012 3:10PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61604 - Karma: 123,113
any lens that covers more than a 200mm span is more than likely a terrible lens. cheaping out on one lens that covers such a huge range is such a waste of time
Jul 20 2012 3:41PM
0 0
profile picture
snowisawesome
Posts: 447 - Karma: 76
I'm not trying to cheap out.  I already have 3 other lenses that cover this range.  I'm looking for something that will work well for hunting.  70mm is a little too tight to follow a person and anything short of 200mm is not going to zoom quite enough to get footage of animals off in the distance.  I'm just trying to avoid changing lenses often.
Jul 20 2012 4:48PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61604 - Karma: 123,113
Im sorry man but you're not going to get high quality shots without changing lenses, just kind of how it is. You can get this lens, but you'll be disappointed with the results.
Jul 20 2012 4:50PM
0 0
profile picture
snowisawesome
Posts: 447 - Karma: 76
So optically I'd be better off then just replacing my 70-300 with the 70-300 VR IF as opposed to jumping to a 28-300 or 18-270 from Tamron?
Jul 20 2012 6:36PM
0 0
profile picture
123+ski
Posts: 2832 - Karma: 581
yes, but that won't help with the fact that it is too tight. You could look for something like a sigma 50-150, but it is probably more than you wanted to spend
Jul 20 2012 8:58PM
0 0
profile picture
123+ski
Posts: 2832 - Karma: 581
I was saying the 50-150, because it is a little wider, but still decent tele, obviously there are other options that are either wider or more tele, but this seemed like something in the right range for you
Jul 20 2012 9:00PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
http://www.adorama.com/alc/article/12879

^this will tell you, in pretty basic terms, why not to buy such a long focal length lens, and instead, get a couple different lenses to cover the range.
Jul 20 2012 9:51PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)