Tamron 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di III-A VC VXD lens review with samples
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 июл 2024
- This superzoom lens is particularly noteworthy as it's available on Fuji X- as well as Sony E-mount cameras - let's see what it can do.
Find it here (Amazon affiliate link - thanks for the support):
geni.us/Tamron18300
Support me on Patreon! / christopherfrost
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonEOSR5Body
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonEFtoRF
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma50mm14Art
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonRF35mm18Macro Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/MarumiFitSlim77 AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020USBPlusMic
Rode Smartlav+ Microphone: geni.us/RodeSmartLavalierPlus
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC3MicAdaptor
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1nMiniRecorder
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMini2FlyMore
Music: 'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/b... 
Хобби
I was expecting to hear "The only thing longer than this lens's focal range is its name."
It's a small detail, but I like that at 7:20 you pointed out that focus distances on lenses are measured _from the sensor_ and not from the front element, then showed exactly how that can matter.
May I suggest that you reconsider the focal lengths you are using to judge sharpness? With a lot of tele and super zoom and lenses sharpness is pretty good for most of the zoom range and they only lose this sharpness on the last couple of millimeters. A lot of "better" 18-135mm super zooms are good up to 120mm for example. So jumping from 140mm to 300mm leaves out an important piece of the picture. I (personally) don't expect a lens like this to be any good at 300mm. But I'd like to know how it performs at 250 or 270mm. Again, just a suggestion. Keep up the great work!
This is an ancient review but I'm new, and I just wanted to say I find your sharpness testing generally helpful in understanding the limitations of a lens and how to get the most out of it. But that's also why I sorta wish a few more focal ranges were covered here. I'm curious how it would perform at 30mm and 200-250mm.
One of lenses review I have been waiting for a long time from Chris
What a treat! A review by Christopher Frost. Used to listen to all your Canon reviews back in the day. Always informative and relaxing.
I purchased this lens new and I'm using it on my Fujifilm X-T4 camera. I found the image quality to be decent enough on all focal lengths. It's a versatile lens in many situations with the zoom range it has. It seems like Tamron have improved the zoom ring smoothness on the recent production batch, because it doesn't feel as stiff as when it was released initially for Sony E-mount. Combined with X-T4 IBIS and this lens VC, the stabilisation is good enough, I can shoot handheld 1/30s with this lens at 300mm and the image is still sharp. Of course if you look close enough it still has chromatic aberration at 18mm in the image corner but you can easily remove it with Lightroom defringe for example. With such a huge focal length range, this is a lens of compromise but it has many good things to make up for it.
Thanks for that. I have been considering this lens for a while but was concerned about the stabilization especially with a dark max aperture at 300mm but good to know my xs10 ibis will allow 1/30 shutter speed
So... now's the turn of Tamron 35-150mm f2-2.8, right?
I have the 17-70 Tamron 2.8, its a great lens. I found wide angle to telephoto were poor at both ends with sharpness. The 11-20 tamron is next on my list. All based on Chris' reviews.
The Tamron 18 300 for the price is a steal compared to other Sony lenses. However, if pixel peeping quality is that I'm going after then I mount the Sigma primes. Nevertheless, the versatility of this lens is unmatched. True, the weight might be a factor as well as that this is basically a day only lens... but you really can use it for almost anything within these limitations. I sold my SELP18105G because it was simply redundant compared to this lens and also image quality was in my opinion better for the Tamron. I even managed to take really sharp photos with a 1/8 shutter speed in my A6000, realizing that the stabilization you see in the viewfinder is kind of a low power mode, as otherwise it would case huge battery drain.
Nice review, I am glad this is available for Fujifilm.
heyyy! I've been waiting to see this review from you. dunno what it is about this lens but its taking ages to get to my local shop
otimo review, parabens!
I think for 4K video work this lens looks excellent. Thanks for the review
Thanks for the review! 🤗 It'd be very useful to timestamp sections of your reviews for RUclips to make chapters-it'd make them even more useful for the audience to be able to quickly jump back in a video to rewatch a part about a particular lens feature after hearing the verdict.
thanks
Nice review. I bought this for my A6100. I also have the Sony 16-55 2.8. I do not pixel peep, but I find this Tamron produces really nice crisp photos. I actually like the out-of-focus rendering, even the parts that are slightly OOF. I think the sharpness is good. Adding a little sharpness, contrast, clarity in post can even improve. I was really pleasantly surprised by the optical image stabilization. Better than some other Sony lenses I have or had. I think what was shaky in the review stabilization test could also be the rolling shutter. This is great for travel in wilderness locations. I took great photos with this of urban birds like American Robins and Starlings on bare snowy branches. I am quite satisfied with this.
Thinking about picking this lens with my A6500 for my upcoming Alaska cruise? Kind of one lens may do the tricks. My question is how dose it do with indoor shots? Will be traveling with family so double back as family photographer! Any suggestion?
@@colorwolf1800 I think it's a good all around lens, but for indoors/ low light photography I recomend you another lens too for this purpose. The Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8 S DA DSM, Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DC DN or the Sigma 30mm F1.4 DC DN.
I have got mine fele days ago.
It is super stable on long range.
Not like in Your or others tests.
But it breaths on more or equal to 200 focal lenght in lower light
Another great review, Chris! Would you please tell when will you be testing the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 for Sony e mount? I am considering selling my sigma 24-70 and buying Tamron 35-150 as I'm mainly into landscapes. Part of the reason I haven't made the jump yet is that I have been waiting for your review!
Great video! Btw, that rock at 0:57 looks like Godzilla :)
Thanks for a wonderful review - so very informative and valuable. Another reviewer also found the image stabilization wasn't up to scratch. After this review, I'm pretty much set on the 70-300 mm Fujinon lens and I'll just- take along a second lens (probably my 16-80) when I travel. Would have loved the 18-300 Tamron, but at long focal lengths it seems it just isn't really sharp. Here in Australia the price differential is minimal between the two, so why not lob for better IQ and IS?
Stop it down to f8 and sharpness at 300mm is hard to complain about. Give it a tiny touch of unsharpen mask and you'll be very satisfied.
Tamron offer an incredible unique 18-400mm super zoom lens for Canon and Nikon APS-C dSLR cameras for quite many years. Sadly this lens has never been available for Sony a-mount cameras and Canon and Nikon version according to some reviews can't be used with autofocus adapters to e-mount cameras. Only in manual focus mode.
I hope that Tamron will dare make a 18-400mm lens for mirrorless cameras too. Nowadays the unavoidable optical issues of such a lens can be fixed digitally inside the cameras.
I personally would rather like to see a 16-300mm. However, that might be a bit to far of a stretch. Going wider is harder.
Please test Nikkor 24-200 f4-6.3! Thanx for test!
Interesting. For eye autofocus, does the Tamron lens perform worse or the same as a Sony native lens? Assuming all the other settings are the same.
I'm still waiting for your review of the Tamron 35-150 2-2.8 before buying one.
How do you compare it with the 17-70? Is it the same image quality -leaving aside the aperture range- in terms of sharpness and aberration? And how do you compare its quality to the kit lens 16-50?
Can you do a review for the Laowa 25mm Ultra Macro?
Great review! Are you going to test the Fuji version of this lens as well? It would be interesting to see how it compares with other lenses that share some of its focal lengths. I did a quick cross-comparison using your videos, and in the image quality department, it looks a bit better than 18-55, 18-135, and 16-80, about the same as 55-200 a worse than 70-300. It would also be interesting to see how it works with Fuji IBIS since it's quite shaky on A5100 without IBIS.
Also, judging by other reviews, it looks like this lens is performing much better stabilization-wise on A6600.
Hello Christopher, could you do after so many years of this lens existing, Canon EF 28-300mm f/3,5-5,6L IS USM review? I am sure people will be interested...
Hi Christopher, are you going someday in a near future to review the lens Tamron 35-150 2-2.8?
Omg I was waiting for you to release this video for so long. Thanks a lot. Could you please make a comparison video of Sony 70-350 G OSS and this one? Thanks in advance.
look who's commenting :)
@@mr.anirbangoswami Look who found it after years🙃
Christopher, do you by any chance have a Fujifilm 100-400 review in the works?
Hello, which is your choice between 18-300, 16-300 and 18-400 ? Which one do you prefer for landscape and nature photography? Do you have any other suggestions?
I would really like to see your review of the Samyang 50mm f1.4 II. I'm unable to make a decision on which 50 to get for my sony camera.
I understand that you dont like the lens Performance in absolute terms. However I would love to see a comparison with sonys 18-135, as other reviews suggested that the tamron is not worse. A direct comparison with the 70-350 would also be nice. Or did I miss this in the video?
70-350 is better in every way, not much but its noticeable especially at 200+ where Tamron is just soft. Its really close to 18-135 but Sony is sharper at the corners, very similar results in the center.
Does this lens work on the canon m50? Or do you have to have the lens adapter?
Im tring to figure out how to update the firmware to V2.0. the tamron web site has a .dat file for the update and no clear way how to install it.
And Tamron 18-400 compared to this one. Which is the best compromise with the best image quality please? It's for an a6300 and I don't know what to choose.
I recently purchased this lens second hand for use on a Sony A9 camera. When I set the focal length past about 120mm, the lens isn't able to focus to infinity anymore and it's max focus distance reduces to about 10 or 15 meters. On the Tamron website, it says that this lens isn't compatible with full frame cameras, but I've seen several websites including this one that says that it works fine on full frame Sony mirrorless cameras. Has anyone else had this issue and know how to resolve it? Thanks!
hey Chis, please test the Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC i would like to see your review.
Thanks for the interesting review. Now that you've tested both, would you say the XF16-80 is significantly better in the shared zoom range?
You cant compare specified zoom duh
How did you turn the VC on and off when there is no switch!?
Sony sensor dust is something else indeed!
Thank you very much for a very objective review. It is very informative and useful. According to the MTF analysis of your past review, for an 18mm-135mm, do you think the Tamron lens is worse than Fuji XF 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6? I am a newbie trying to understand how to compare lenses based on MTF. Another question, in image quality (especially in low light), is the Fuji lens much better than the Tamron 18mm-300mm? Your reply would be very helpful to me. Thank you.
I just bought the Tamron 18-300mm today and I have already the Fujinon 18-135mm. I bought the Tamron as my Fujinon 18-135mm show its age, mostly due to my abuse of the lens.
The first thing I did is comparing the MTF charts but that's comparing apples to oranges. Fuji (15 and 45 lines per mm) and Tamron (10 and 30 lines per mm) are using different sizes which makes it pretty much impossible to compare both lenses. The Tamron scores considerably better, but that's not a surprise if it's using 50% less for measuring the details (30 lines per mm vs 45 lines per mm). In watched both videos with the test charts and it seems that for the Fuji the corners are a tad sharper on f/11 when photographing on 18 mm and the Tamron is quite soft on 300mm, but that's still 165mm more than the Fujinon can offer.
The Tamron has also very decent macro capabilities the Fujinon doesn't have. Since the capabilities are quite similar and the Tamron is a lot newer I would personally go for the Tamron. Moreover it's a lot more versatile and the extra range is quite handy, although I wouldn't use the lens for photographing wildlife based on the results of the test charts and the slow aperture.
But one thing I can say about the Fujinon 18-135mm is that it's pretty much indestructable. It got splashed with salt water in Antarctica, fell into the desert sand of Sossus Vlei, laid in water for one hour in my backpack when I didn't realize my bottle was not closed, I backpacked it through Iceland where I carried the lens outside through snow and rain and it fell numerous times from a considerable height due to my clumsiness. And still it works like a charm.
Does anyone know how you switch off VC in the Sony camera?
i had the tamron 18-250mm, didnt really like it so i sold it, but im wondering now if it really was that bad, and i cant find a single review on it.
Interesting that you had much different results with this lens than Dustin Abbott
Great review Chris! I kindda disappointed by the optical perfomance of this len. That's a shame as it seems Tamron has two different strategy in lens design for apsc lenses vs fullframe. All of their mirrorless fullframe lineup had been excellent but in apsc they are good or just ok. The problem is their apsc lenses are a little pricy, but dn't have some of the features of fullframe lenses and lag behind in optics too. Sigma has a way better strategy in this field. Sticking to a 67mm filter thread for apsc lenses doesn't seem to be any helpful in that regard also.
Please Christopher, test the Nikon 24-200 :)
no fullframe samples(
will it work with alpha a7ii?
How would one compare the image quality of this lens with a "super-zoom" camera like the Sony Rx 10 III? Would an APS-C camera coupled with the Tamron 18-300 be a better choice as a "super zoom"? Focal length wouldn't be too far apart - I'm assuming the 18-300 is the equivalent of 27-450 and with the larger sensor you could crop a bit to get roughly the same look if you were zoom into 600mm (as the Rx 10 III offers). Thoughts? Anyone done an actual comparison?
a bit late to comment, but I've done a comparison of this camera against super zooms including Lumix FZ300 and FZ1000. What might be a bit surprising is that those lenses can actually render a bit sharper of an image in some cases against the Tamron. I'd say that overall they are comparable, and bridge cameras can be very capable, the FZ1000 in particular being quite responsive.
The real benefit to the Tamron over the bridge camera is that it is part of your interchangeable kit and it also has a manual zoom action which I prefer over the zoom-by-wire rockers on the bridge cameras (though FZ1000 was pretty good).
While I haven't used the RX10 IV, I've looked into it extensively, and its image quality is better than the FZ1000 and as such would expect it to be better than the Tamron. The lens Sony put into RX10 is remarkable with even further reach.
Still, the Tamron is quite inexpensive and turns most APC-S cameras into a bridge experience with all the benefits of the APS-C sensor.
I have an A6000 and after 8 years it's almost dead, Viewfiner doesn't work, doesn't recognise the lens have the time. Anyway I have the 55-200mm Sony lens and all I photograph is wildlife, everything from Hummingbirds to Frogs. Would love to know if 18-300m is the next step up for me and also what new body should I get? The 55-200 doesn't cut the mustard anymore, it's crap aperture and just not crispy at all. People are suggesting A6400. My budget is around 1k USD.
What sony camera is this
I cannot find where you mention the camera used for the test but the photos show a full frame camera. edit You do say and are using a 7 11R. Are you sure this would produce the same results that a APS-c camera would? Your review is the most critical review for sharpest on this lens that I have seen. Just saying
I dont understand why you dont test the sony rx 10
I want to buy an all-in-one lens for Sony A6000 and I'm oscillating between the Sony 18-135 and the Tamron 18-300 (strictly for photos, I don't make video at all). I don't know which one to buy! Unfortunately, no one on RUclips made a comparison between the 2 lenses (Sony 18-135 vs Tamron 18-300 / on Sony E mount, for photography), on RUclips there is only one video with a comparison between these two lenses, but this video it is very badly made (it does not show a side by side comparison between photos taken with this two lenses) and it is only for video.
recently, Ive got a Tamron 70-300mm on Sony A6000 and its great, but missing the image stabilization, and Iam still using the 16-50mm kit lens. So I was just thinking about returning the lens, selling the kit lens, and getting the 18-300mm. What do you guys think ? Is it worth replacing for 18-300, or should I just keep it and get something like Tamron 17-70mm ?
Hi I am just curious...did you get 18-300?
hey, yeah I got it, but then Ive replaced it with Sony 70-350 G OSS. I mainly cared about the zoom and image quality, and got the Sony lens for a good price from Ebay.
Having owned the Tamron lens 28-300mm,the lens creep was so bad l sold it for parts both Tamron and Nikon had the same lens creep problem,very sad a complete failure of Quality Control...
Prices dropped this 18-300 with 11-20 & A6400 combo cost almost price of A7m4 body
I would rather prefer something like 16-135 with less optical compromises and like a 4.0-5.0 aperture, than this 6.3 on a crop camera and poor quality 300
Maybe the Sony 18-135 is what you looking for
I would happily trade the 300mm to 200mm or even 140mm for better quality and a faster apture
If you had to choose between this and the DSLR one 16-300mm with EF to E adapter equipped with drop-in filters, which one would you choose and why? How the image quality would compare? Assuming that it would be accompanied with Sony 10-20mm G.
Versus the 70-350 from the Sony (comparing CF's other video ruclips.net/video/eoR6raIBHJ0/видео.html ) it is easy to see that the VC of Tamron is no where close to the OSS of Sony
You keep referring to the lens as a "super telephoto". True, but it's also a moderately wide lens at 18 mm. The lens is designed to be good for travel or where you just want to carry one lens. If your using this lens you should not be expecting very sharp images and it's kind of crazy to compare this to normal super telephoto lens. Even using very expensive glass, I'm pretty sure the physics just aren't there to make a real sharp lens with this range at a reasonable size and weight.
So, if I understand the video, it's built well, captures reasonable images is adequate when your desire to carry one lens outweighs your need for very sharp photos.
First!
Such a shame this lens is so pricy as it's really the only option of its kind for Fuji. I really want a travel lens with a long focal length at the tele end, but wide enough at the other end to not have to keep changing lenses in poor conditions. If this lens was around £250 or so I'd buy it without a second thought, but for the price I want much better sharpness. Always going to feel like my photos aren't going to be as good as they could be if I buy this :(
Christopher, you should change that a5100 to at least a6xxx series because a5100 gives significantly lower resolution ie sharpness compared to newer ones! and most people use the 6xxx series!
The a5100 uses the same sensor as the a6000 and resolving power on the sensor is basically identical to all other a6xxx series cameras. Not sure where you got this information that the a5100 is lower resolution.
You are completely incorrect about that any difference in resolution - I have no idea where you've gotten your information on that
@Mrcina - I own 2 cameras: a Sony A5100 and a Sony A6000. I'm a pixel peeper and I've done many tests with both cameras, I've tested with several lenses from Sigma and Sony, and what I found after these tests is that the resulting images are identical from all points of view.
Does this len works in Canon 1500d....please advice
No, Sony E mount
It's a mirrorless design won't work on any DSLR camera. Though you can find some other Tamron lenses like this with older designs, Chris has already reviewed pretty much all of them.
First! Super first!
Almost....
@@Badonicus OMG, Mr, you just won an Enemy for life! 🤪
Man is this a kind of an OCD right? You always want to be the first? Lol
@@networm64 it's just a long running joke 🤣
Yeah, I have this, do not buy this under any circumstances. It's soft, it's awful and should be put out to die, my 35-70mm 3.5 AIS from the 80s is as sharp as my 35mm 1.8G and this big hunk of trash doesn't even come close. I recently purchased the 24-120 f4 and it produces incredible images that can't even hope to be achieved by this. Do not buy this, you will have regrets.