Tamron 28-300VC my opinion
During the WordWidePhotowalk in Amsterdam the Dutch Tamron distributor Transcontinenta was so kind to lend us some lenses.
During the day part of the walk I tried out the Tamron 28-300VC, as you already know I’m not a reviewer that will show you 100% crops, shoot brick walls or bombard you with technical mambo mambo that there is a 1.3 pixel chromatic aberration in the extreme corners. What I try to do is give you my opinion for the usefulness of a lens and if it’s interesting for you to buy (or not).
Let me start out by stating that there are two thoughts among street shooters, some will burn me on the stake because I don’t promote the use of primelenses only, and yeah I know you can’t beat a great prime, trust me I LOVE the 50mm 1.4 and it’s awesome in quality and gives me goosebumps when I shoot with, but it also frustrates me sometimes because I just can’t get the shot I want, now some will say “that’s the challenge” but for me that doesn’t fly, I want to tell a story and with that story there needs to be a certain crop/composition and for that I can’t shoot everything with one lens, so I LOVE zooms, and yeah again I know their quality is often less than the primes, although some zooms are awesome and are for me on par with the primes.
However you look at it however there is always something you can’t shoot for the simple reason that sometimes you need a lot of tele, and sometimes wide is amazing, so the perfect lens would be something that covers all let’s say from 10-1200mm on a fixed aperture of 1.8 and I almost forgot it has to be not much bigger than let’s say a good 24-70 right? Oh almost forgot we don’t want to pay more than $1000.00….. and then I woke up.
But there are some lenses that look (at least on paper) very interesting Canon, Sigma, Nikon and Tamron all make the so called “superzooms” and often they are not that expensive (although the Canon version is not very cheap), that price and range added together must of course already trigger your senses that we don’t talk about STELLAR performance here. However is that important? Well I think not, of course we don’t want a lens that hunts, is terribly soft or just doesn’t work all together on a certain system, for that range I’m more than willing to do a “few” sacrifices.
For a lot of people with Full Frame cameras there is however a “slight” problem, most of the superzooms are meant for crop cameras. However I found that Tamrons 28-300 VC was made for Full Frame cameras so I was more than curious to try this lens out during the WorldWidePhotoWalk in Amsterdam I hosted last weekend, especially for street photography I just love the range of 28-300 and the added VC (Image Stabilization) is of course also a nice added bonus.
Now let’s look at the lens itself:
It’s a relatively small/compact lens that extends to a nice length for the 300mm part of the spectrum, when mounted on the 5DMKIII it feels very nicely balanced and the build quality feels solid although a bit less sturdy than the Canon 24-105 for example (but that’s no surprise I think). The aperture from the Tamron runs from 3.5 to 6.3, seeing the situations I would use the lens in this is more than adequate, I will mostly use this lens on the street and probably stopped down to f5.6 or f8.0, I would love of course to be able to shoot wide open but you know with lenses like this that this will not give you perfect results.
As you can see in the shots above (the guys with the masks) the lens really did for me what I wanted. If I would have used a 50mm prime lens I would have totally missed these shots, simply because they were too far away from me, now it was no problem, I aimed and shot and zoomed in even a bit more and shot and ended up with something I would normally miss…. man I love this….. but do I ?
Well yes and no.
During the photowalk I loved shooting with the Tamron 28-300VC but in the back of my mind there always was this wonder “will the images be sharp, the way I want it ?”
And this is the only thing I have with the Tamron 28-300VC the images are never really tacksharp, when closed down to f8.0 they are MORE than acceptable, actually pretty good, but wide open (a bit as expected) they are far from crisp, some sharpening in Photoshop/Lightroom enhances the images a lot but let’s put it this way it’s not near the quality you get from the combination of the Canon 24-105L and Canon 70-200f2.8 IS L, but hey wakeup call, we talk about a price range where you can buy a lot of the 28-300’s for. However in my case I do own both Canon lenses….. will I be willing to buy the Tamron lens?
Well it boils all down to that question right?
And the answer is, probably yes.
During the Amsterdam photowalk I loved the range the lens gave me, I did miss the f2.8 aperture of the 70-200 in some situations but during the day time this will hardly be a problem, especially with the new super performance with noise in cameras like the 5DMKIII. Stopped down to f8 I was happy with the results from the lens at the tele end and at f5.6 from the wider part, wide open I was not that impressed to be totally honest and I would not use it wide open that much, HOWEVER… all images I shot wide open are still images that, when printed, can be in a portfolio without any doubt. And this is something people do have to realize, we are reading a lot of reviews, opinions etc. online that are always focussing on 100% views, sometimes even 400% views, straight out of the camera samples etc. often forgetting (and this is also seen in most of those images) that it’s NOT about that final bit of sharpness, it’s not about that bokeh that is slightly more creamy on lens A but a bit more yoghurt looking with little droplets on lens B, it’s about nailing the shot/story YES or NO, and with the 28-300 you have to be an incredibly bad photographer to not be able to at least get the shot, the AF is fast enough to get you shooting right away, the sharpness at f8 is more than enough for even cropping, and when you use your camera like me on AUTO-ISO with a shutterspeed of at least 1/250 you can almost most certainly say that you WILL get that shot you want. And if you miss it… well it probably isn’t the fault of the lens or camera but sometimes that just happens.
Conclusion
The Tamron 28-300VC covers a lot of ground.
It’s not the fastest AF around but it’s pretty fast.
The VC is very good, probably better than the Canon IS system, although I did have some weird vibration happen sometimes (probably just my sample).
The image quality is good enough, CA is visible but nothing that Lightroom or DxO won’t fix, sharpness is a bit soft when stopped down 1 stop but gets better at 2 stops, but even wide open it’s good enough for print in almost all cases.
At this price point you get an awesome range which for me is ideal for street photography.
When I know what I’m gonna shoot I will without any doubt opt for the lens that fits that scene, but most of the time I don’t want to carry around a bag with lenses and just the camera with one lens and in those circumstances I think the luxe of having this range heavily outweights the image quality that is (for me) ok.
For the Dutch people you can order the lens from here
For our international visitors, visit B&H via this link and support our blog.
I see your point but for example I feel really uncomfortable with a heavy gear around the streets. I mean…last time I had my D200+battery pack+SIGMA 24-70mm f2.8…good lens…but definitely too much! Everybody look at you in the exact instant you lift the camera to take the shot! I’ve just pubblished a post on my blog about his feeling http://www.psimoduloquadro.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/street-people.html 🙂
Cheers
Hey Frank, nice read. Since this lens is only $420 at B&H for my Sony camera, it looks like a very attractive all-around solution for me. It could replace two lenses! But like you, I ask myself, “Is it good enough?” If I was shooting with a full-frame camera, I would probably opt for the Nikon 24-120mm f4 VR or the Canon 24-105 f4 L IS, but I shoot with an APS-C camera, and I am thinking about shooting with a Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 or maybe the Sony 16-105mm f3.5-5.6, because they are almost like superzooms (significanly greater range than my kit lens), yet they seem to deliver really sharp images (better than the superzooms). No superzoom I have ever considered seems to give great quality long shots, so I figure I’ll get a 70-300. I will probably miss many shots because of that though, and I will be weighing down my camera bag with yet another lens. I was seriously considering the Sigma 18-250mm or the Tamron 18-270mm, but I just can’t get myself to feel o.k. with the low-quality results at long focal lengths beyond 200mm. Afterall, the reason to get such a lens is so you can shoot beyond about 200mm, right? Otherwise why not just stick with the 18-125mm or an 18-135mm, and then you can just crop a little to get focal lengths a little longer. But to get the equivalent of 210mm or 250mm, you just can’t really do it with those shorter lenses, unless you crop way too much. So the superzooms are really for the every day shots, and a few really long shots. But I can’t handle the low quality of the really long shots. You may or may not have experience with those other superzooms, like the Tamron 18-270mm. If you do, how does the 28-300mm on the full-frame camera compare with the 18-270mm (or something similar) on an APS-C camera? Would you say the 28-300mm Tamron shoots sharper images at its longest focal length (300mm) than most other superzooms that you have tried can shoot at their longest focal length? Is it really light? How do you like the feel of the zoom ring and the manual focus ring? I like Tamron lenses for their good quality feel. I just got a 10-24mm Tamron, and it performs great at f8 and f11, where I use it most, because I like to get the sharpest photos I can get. The 28-300mm would compliment the 10-24mm very well, and make for a really good walk-around pair or lenses (and good for back-packing trips). I think a lens made for full-frame cameras would be a great performer on a camera with an APS-C sensor. Do you think you would choose that lens or one of the other lenses, like the Tamron 18-270mm, if you were in my situation?
Here is my situation. I have a Sony A55 with the 18-55mm kit lens. I have a Sony 30mm macro lens (because it was cheap and I wanted to play with shooting macro photos), and now I have a Tamron 10-24mm f3.5-4.5 for the wide shots. If Sony made a lens like the Nikon 24-120mm f4 VR, I would want to get that, but there is nothing like that in the Sony line. Plus, I don’t have a lot of money, and I would like to keep things pretty light. The 10-24mm is a little heavy, but I think of it as a necessity. I can leave the 30mm at home. I want to replace my 18-55m with a longer lens, but the Sigma 18-125mm might not be the best solution. It is a little cheaper than the 28-300mm Tamron, but then I would be tempted to carry a third lens, like the Tamron 70-300mm. I carry a 1,500 gram computer with me every day, and I often carry two cameras (my Sony A55 with the three lenses I listed above, and a Sigma SD14 with a 24-70mm f3.5-5.6 (a very light zoom lens – only a little heavier than my Sony 18-55mm lens). I am not so much a street shooter. I prefer to shoot models, landscapes, and nature (like bees and flowers and trees). Maybe I am answering myself with this last part, but I have probably not been so concerned with superzooms, because the photos I shoot are not normally rushed at all.
My only experience with these superzooms is this one. As mentioned in the review it’s a lens that will get you shots that you would normally miss when shooting in situations you don’t know what you will get.
It will NEVER EVER replace the “normal” lenses because the quality indeed is less, but hey it’s a superzoom.
When you can stop down to f8.0 the quality is pretty ok bordering on really good, wide open it’s…. well it’s a superzoom.
What you have to realize however is that you don’t want to judge images on your screen on 100%, if you print on A4-A2 the images will pretty much stand their ground.
People are a bit too focussed (pun intended) on sharpness they see on their screen while they hardly ever print 2×3 meter prints which they judge from up close 😀
It will give you an incredible reach for little money, little weight and the image quality will be great when printed.
From there on one should make their own decission 😀
Boy, Frank, you could techno me to death, but it is good that you boil it down. Let’s have some Nadine on fire to give us a break from science! YES!
There will be a whole series with Nadine and technique next week, PLUS she will be one of the main guests on the next videowebcast “The DOORhof is always open”.
Hey Frank, nice read. I have the new Tamron 70-300 which is totally awesome! I respect your opinion about using a zoom on the streets. If it fits you better then why not, right? For me I like to take that challenge and use a 35mm or 50mm on the streets. I had my experiences using the zoom and I personally think it’s like shooting/ looking from behind glass..like in zoo watching monkeys etc. I also prefer the look and feel of photo shot with a 35 or 50mm lens.
We already had our small talk about this during the walk and it was a pity you didn’t used you Xpro-1 because then we could have joined forces and get into the zone together and challenge each other;). Also wanted to see the camera of yours in action and compare it to my X100.
There is no right or wrong indeed, just how people work.
For street I LOVE the Fuji’s but it was raining so hard I did not have the guts to take it out to be honest.