I found this video to be pretty misleading. I have had the Tamron 16-300mm lens for a little over a month now and use it on my Canon 80D. I experienced none of the distortion the reviewer showed at maximum reach. I suspect that the primary cause for his results is that he left the image stabilizer turned on and was using a tripod. Most photographers know that when using a tripod you turn the image stabilizer off. I would caution anyone not to rely on this review when seriously considering this lens. I am very happy with it.
Great review! I have a 70-300 mm lens & was planning to buy this one but after seeing the comparison photos, I think I will just stick to the lens I have. Oh! & what's up with people making fun of his accent? I think he speaks much better English than what you guys speak and/or write. You don't have to write your "expert" comments on each and every video you watch. Crazy people!
I could see this lens being a great vacation lens, simply because you can pack one lens and get some very nice looking images! Sure it doesn't compare to a 70-300, but neither does a 24-85 or 17-50. I would feel confident that I can capture landscapes and then have that extra reach, in case Bigfoot pops out of the bushes or I want to capture a Ram decending a mountain peek!!
hello I have this Tamron 16 mm 300mm lens it is an excellent lens at 16 mm as well as at 300mm I went on vacation I took great photos it is a versatile lens and not bulky when you want to leave I advise everyone but everyone knows it when taking pictures on a tripod you have to disconnect the stabilization except for Sunday photographers
Hi Mate, I heard some people saying that this lens doesn't go till 300mm means they were saying like they got much tighter images with canon 55-250 than this 16-300 ... what's your view on this ... I am planning to get this one for my APS-C camera
I have both lenses for my D7000, I'm a pixel peeper and I have always been disappointed by the quality of the 70-300, only occasionally do I get sharp images at 100%. The 16-300 images sometimes seem sharper, or at least are no worse.
Its also available in Sony/A-mount format. Not quite sure how this can be the longest focal length available as Sigma has had a 50-500mm out since....late 90's maybe? A far larger lens of course.
I wish I would have seen this review before I bought this lens. Luckily, the store let me exchange it for a much better lens, the Canon 18-200. Thanks for a good and honest review.
+Cesar Reynerio Zapata Arauz this was published 2 years ago - so we no longer have the lens. We do however have a comparison of this lens to the Sigma 18-300mm on our site (not one that we did - but very popular - see here: lensvid.com/gear/battle-convenience-sigma-18-300-vs-tamron-16-300-review/
Sorry, but whats the purpose of comparing this with 70-300 lens ? The people who wants to buy this lens are the ones who are looking for one lens to to do all kind of things. The comparison should have been among the Nikon/Canon/Sigma 18-200/250/300 types of lenses, or say its predecessor 18-270. Comparing with 70-300 dosent give the correct picture JUST because its longest focal length matches.
Hmmm.... The purpose of comparing these two lenses is that people can decide if they want to carry two lenses in their bags like 18-55 & 70-300 or just one mega zoom lens like this 16-300 mm
I had this lens but returned it and have nikon 18-300mm which I'm very satisfied with. His review is the best so far in regards to this lens. Tamron is an excellent lens and comparable to the nikon 18-300mm during daytime.....is in low light situations that you can clearly see the difference between the 2 lenses . Also the Nikon is a more silent lens but that doesn't bother me.
Typically the shorter the zoom (not focal length) the higher the IQ of a lens - we tested the lens on a Nikon but there is a good chance the Canon will also outperform this lens.
Khaled Al Khder No. the other way around. It's pretty simple when you think about it - the smaller the zoom (typically) the sharper the lens - the 70-300mm is a 4.2x zoom lens and the 16-300mm is an 18.7x zoom lens - even without testing both you can see that it will be much harder to design a good 18.7x zoom lens vs. only 4.3x zoom.
Pick up a used or gray market Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 that will range from $750 to $950. Waaaay better than this lens or anything else you're probably considering.
+truknayr23 Hey, you know this is a different language to his native language, cut him some slack. He could have filmed it in a different language, would that have been more convenient for you ?
So you should have been more observant, I’m also not an English speaker but can always hear if the person is not, even to the different accents of The English.
+Coils Eight please refrain from coursing. I am not sure what you mean by swap pictures but you can see side by side on the full review: lensvid.com/gear/lensvid-exclusive-tamron-16-300mm-f3-5-6-3-di-ii-vc-pzd-lens-review/
I found this video to be pretty misleading. I have had the Tamron 16-300mm lens for a little over a month now and use it on my Canon 80D. I experienced none of the distortion the reviewer showed at maximum reach. I suspect that the primary cause for his results is that he left the image stabilizer turned on and was using a tripod. Most photographers know that when using a tripod you turn the image stabilizer off. I would caution anyone not to rely on this review when seriously considering this lens. I am very happy with it.
The stabilizer was off. It really depends on how far away your target is and to what lens you are compering this.
ruclips.net/video/9LudX0GmLZQ/видео.html
Finally a lens with two focus rings!
Great review! I have a 70-300 mm lens & was planning to buy this one but after seeing the comparison photos, I think I will just stick to the lens I have. Oh! & what's up with people making fun of his accent? I think he speaks much better English than what you guys speak and/or write. You don't have to write your "expert" comments on each and every video you watch. Crazy people!
I could see this lens being a great vacation lens, simply because you can pack one lens and get some very nice looking images! Sure it doesn't compare to a 70-300, but neither does a 24-85 or 17-50. I would feel confident that I can capture landscapes and then have that extra reach, in case Bigfoot pops out of the bushes or I want to capture a Ram decending a mountain peek!!
hello I have this Tamron 16 mm 300mm lens it is an excellent lens at 16 mm as well as at 300mm I went on vacation I took great photos it is a versatile lens and not bulky when you want to leave I advise everyone but everyone knows it when taking pictures on a tripod you have to disconnect the stabilization except for Sunday photographers
Hi Mate, I heard some people saying that this lens doesn't go till 300mm means they were saying like they got much tighter images with canon 55-250 than this 16-300 ... what's your view on this ... I am planning to get this one for my APS-C camera
I have both lenses for my D7000, I'm a pixel peeper and I have always been disappointed by the quality of the 70-300, only occasionally do I get sharp images at 100%. The 16-300 images sometimes seem sharper, or at least are no worse.
Its also available in Sony/A-mount format. Not quite sure how this can be the longest focal length available as Sigma has had a 50-500mm out since....late 90's maybe? A far larger lens of course.
Longest zoom - not longest focal length.
to get a sharper image use higher shutter speed. and if possible one stop up.
I wish I would have seen this review before I bought this lens. Luckily, the store let me exchange it for a much better lens, the Canon 18-200. Thanks for a good and honest review.
justinjsaley Sure thing!
i believe that the closest comparison for this Tamron lens is the Nikon 18-300mm...can you do that comparison? thanks
+Cesar Reynerio Zapata Arauz this was published 2 years ago - so we no longer have the lens. We do however have a comparison of this lens to the Sigma 18-300mm on our site (not one that we did - but very popular - see here:
lensvid.com/gear/battle-convenience-sigma-18-300-vs-tamron-16-300-review/
+Lensvid great....thanks!
thank you for the information..
Sorry, but whats the purpose of comparing this with 70-300 lens ? The people who wants to buy this lens are the ones who are looking for one lens to to do all kind of things. The comparison should have been among the Nikon/Canon/Sigma 18-200/250/300 types of lenses, or say its predecessor 18-270. Comparing with 70-300 dosent give the correct picture JUST because its longest focal length matches.
Hmmm.... The purpose of comparing these two lenses is that people can decide if they want to carry two lenses in their bags like 18-55 & 70-300 or just one mega zoom lens like this 16-300 mm
I had this lens but returned it and have nikon 18-300mm which I'm very satisfied with.
His review is the best so far in regards to this lens.
Tamron is an excellent lens and comparable to the nikon 18-300mm during daytime.....is in low light situations that you can clearly see the difference between the 2 lenses .
Also the Nikon is a more silent lens but that doesn't bother me.
Which better canon 70-300mm is usm or Tamron 16-300mm? Which better in image quality and sharpness ??
Thank you
Typically the shorter the zoom (not focal length) the higher the IQ of a lens - we tested the lens on a Nikon but there is a good chance the Canon will also outperform this lens.
You mine the Tamron 16-30 it's sharper than the canon 70-300 ? With canon 700d ?
Tamron 16-300
Khaled Al Khder No. the other way around. It's pretty simple when you think about it - the smaller the zoom (typically) the sharper the lens - the 70-300mm is a 4.2x zoom lens and the 16-300mm is an 18.7x zoom lens - even without testing both you can see that it will be much harder to design a good 18.7x zoom lens vs. only 4.3x zoom.
Hi, my camera is canon 700d , what's the best for my camera ? Tamron or canon? I like to shot birds , so what the good lens for that ?
Thank you
Pick up a used or gray market Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 that will range from $750 to $950. Waaaay better than this lens or anything else you're probably considering.
Great review, very helpful thank you. < 3
Nice. But please correct the spello at 09:45 - *videos*. Thanks.
that is our old ending frame - it is long gone from our videos but I can't fix it in the older vids - thanks for noticing it anyway :)
Ahh.. I see.
eeeehhhhh,,, eh, ehhhhhh, eeeeeeehhhh, eh, eh, ehhh, ehh, eeh, eeehh ,eh eh, eh, ehhhh
what size lens protector is suitable for this lens ?
If you are asking about filter thread the answer is 67mm.
@@IddoGenuth thank you 🙏
focus ring the we have the cond foucs ring hha fail
thank you sir
hi dose it fit to Nikon D610 ?
how about the photos and videos quality
No - it is a DX lens (you can use it in crop mode but I am not sure how good of an idea it is - you'll get a very low res images).
very nice
DECEABA VORBIȚI DACĂ NU ARĂTAȚI TESTELE CU IMAGINILE
nice review but too much ehs and uhs
👍
Eh..... eh..... eh..... eh.... cmon man... lose that!
+truknayr23 Hey, you know this is a different language to his native language, cut him some slack. He could have filmed it in a different language, would that have been more convenient for you ?
dupton69 Ey man... my bad... my bad.. did not know it was not his native tongue... I am not a native speaker of English myself. Cheers!
So you should have been more observant, I’m also not an English speaker but can always hear if the person is not, even to the different accents of The English.
what kind of person swaps the pictures when doing a comparison reviews ?! are you fucking serious ?
+Coils Eight please refrain from coursing.
I am not sure what you mean by swap pictures but you can see side by side on the full review:
lensvid.com/gear/lensvid-exclusive-tamron-16-300mm-f3-5-6-3-di-ii-vc-pzd-lens-review/
מבטא חצי ישראלי חצי אמריקאי