Tamron Lens Advice

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Does anyone have any experience of the Tamron AF 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2

Looking at getting a cheap 'macro' lens for xmas...

Cheers Jacob

[ron1863]

Hi,

I'm a Sony Alpha user and use this site to review lenses. Here's the lens you are looking for with some readers reviews. Also check out the Sigma equivalent, which is excellent value.

Minolta Sony alpha lens database - Dyxum.com

[Tormentil]

I have that lens. I bought one when I bought my 350D 'cause it was on offer (£70) and I wanted to get into close ups quickly. I new that sooner or later I'd have to upgrade to long and macro lens of a much higher spec. That said, I have had some "decent" shots from it, but they are a bit on the "soft" side.

Being very light, I do take it on hols with me, even though I know its limitations.

I'd give you some examples of shots I've taken with it, but I'm off to a reunion weekend down March way, in a few minutes. Or you could trawl through my web site for them.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Tormentil, would you recommend the lens or is it not worth the money in your opinion? I am looking to just get my first lens as all I have at the moment is the 18-55mm lens you get with the Canon 400D.

Basically I am looking for a lens to photograph flowers, insects etc with.
Cheers Jacob

[beckiscott]

ive got the non-di version of that tamron lens. it started producing err 99 days after its warranty ran out. the macro capability aint great, minimum focusing distance is 90cm, and its only 1:2 so you're not going to get anything awesome out of it.

you might be better with canon f1.8 50mm. not a true macro lens but it focuses quite close (if you can get close enough to your subject - ie not good for bugs but great for flowers) and is only £60! plus a f1.8 it can be really creative!

[Wightman]

I have the lens which I use with my canon 300d. It is worth the money and is a good starter lens. Its not a true macro and the longer working distance takes a bit of getting used to. I generally use it for distance shots (I have a sigma 105mm 1:2.8 DG for my close work) with which I get decent results. If you go to a decent camera shop I'm sure they'll let you have a play about with it.

Hope this helps
Gary

[mystictonka]

Originally Posted by beckiscott

ive got the non-di version of that tamron lens. it started producing err 99 days after its warranty ran out. the macro capability aint great, minimum focusing distance is 90cm, and its only 1:2 so you're not going to get anything awesome out of it.

you might be better with canon f1.8 50mm. not a true macro lens but it focuses quite close (if you can get close enough to your subject - ie not good for bugs but great for flowers) and is only £60! plus a f1.8 it can be really creative!

I had this problem with the earlier tamron lense, it is caused by the grease they used to use on the diaphragm going gooey, its worth speaking to intro 2020 who import this lense as if you have the original receipt they may still do a warranty repair

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by beckiscott

you might be better with canon f1.8 50mm. not a true macro lens but it focuses quite close (if you can get close enough to your subject - ie not good for bugs but great for flowers) and is only £60! plus a f1.8 it can be really creative!

i'd go with that - and you could always add a set of tubes to get full macro (tubes are cheap 70 notes in jessops but as little as 30 on line) - its also worth noting that the f1.8 50mm turns up secondhand a lot so you can often find it for 30 notes or less - check ebay both the auctions and the traders

the tamron is an okay 300mm zoom but none of these jack of all lenses do macro that well imo

[Tormentil]

Originally Posted by eeyore

the tamron is an okay 300mm zoom but none of these jack of all lenses do macro that well imo

They don't do too bad.

[eeyore]

no , they are okay - but not as good as a dedicated macro.