Now an owner of the Tamron 18-300, I can see why people like it. As for my assessment, it optically is incredible. Body wise, it is not up to the same standard as Sony or Sigma lens. But for the price and its capabilities, it is a great lens for the photographer on a budget. Most people will be hard pressed to differentiate pictures taken with a Sony, Sigma or Tamron. As I use the lens, I hope the zooming smooths out, it's a little rough. I still can't get over how it works in macro mode. Incredible.

@tanmaysakpalofficial

10 ай бұрын

Looks really interesting to me as an all in one lens for apsc 👍

Hi Dustin. Yhanks for your excellent review! love your picture at 12:16!!!

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

This seems to be a very good lens option for me and my documentary landscape environmental photography especially as I shoot everything at F8. I am a Fuji shooter so I'm really pleased that they finally opened up their lens mount to third party lens makers, this has been for me one of the biggest drawbacks of a Fuji system, really looking forward the Sigma's lenses.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly!

@exploreandunravel5773

2 жыл бұрын

Purchased it today for Sony ZV e10

Nice lens and great review. Really would love to see this on the EOS-M mount.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

I've heard that a few times, but there just doesn't seem to be much third party development on EF-M

Good to hear that ultrazooms are finally getting decent optical performance compared from those released in the DSLR days, kudos to tamron for doing a great job on that. I'm curious though, would you also be testing the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8?

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

My review came out yesterday.

I don't need this lens on Sony E as I shoot FF there but it's is a contender on Fuji X as a travel lens on my X-T3. Right now my shoulder bag set up is the X-T3 with battery grip with the 16-55 F2.8, the 55-200 and the 10-24 F4 WR as my daylight set up. For the evening/low light I swap out the 55-200 to the Fuji F1.4 or the Viltrox 33mm F1.4. Maybe both lenses. That shoulder bag gets pretty heavy though with lens filters, adaptors and a drink bottle also.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

That sounds like a good application.

Thank you for this information

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

My pleasure

Teacher, may I ask, I currently use x-t4, the lenses are xf16, xf56, xf70-300, I am sure to buy tamron 150-500mm, but I also like tamron 17-70 and tamron 18-300, if it is you , tamron 17-70, tamron 18-300, xf70-300, these three lenses, choose two or one, how would you choose, can you give me a reference??? Thank you

I'm a frequent traveller and currently I'm using my Fuji X-T2 with my trusted 18-135mm, but the extra reach sure does sound appealing to me. I'm a bit surprised that in the range of 50-70mm the image quality tends to be a little bit less as this is mostly the case at the telephoto range of such superzooms.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

It sounds like this lens might be a good one for you.

Very informative review, thanks! Have you noticed any fringing/chromatic aberration at some circumstances? I've seen some other reviews and I've notices some fringing which makes me rethink about buying this lens. Edit: I'm now going to watch the Definitive Review now.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

I think the Definitive Review should certain help.

I think this is an interesting competition to the Sony 18-135. Sony’s is very compact, but the Tamron has longer reach. The 18-135 was about perfect for my goals at the time: all in one lens for long distance hiking. Needed to be small and do anything I could want. Barely wide enough for landscapes, impressive reach, and most importantly lightweight. Ultimately though I found myself reaching a point where I started to value image quality over versatility. 18mm wasn’t *quite* wide enough, and image quality at 135mm was solidly *ok*. So, swapped out to a wide angle zoom, and if I don’t need to worry about weight the 70-350 is pretty great to have as a second lens. All that said…. Being able to reach 300mm on APSC without needing the lens swap is enticing. This could honestly be a great recommendation for someone who is really new and doesn’t know what they like to shoot. Close focus range, long max focal length, just wide enough, image quality is good.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

That's a fair assessment.

I use it on a Sony a7iii for video and I’m super happy with it. Autofocus is surprising … better than with my tamron 28-75 … just have less option to do setting and most go automotic for shutter speed etc … but all work super fine … filming sport mainly. Some footage on my channel video from Argentina world championship inline speed skating

@DustinAbbottTWI

Жыл бұрын

That's great!

Thank you my friends. I think for the money is worth every penny.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed.

Hi sir..great video. I am using the tamron 18-300 lence with my sony a6400. Can you tell me how to on the vibration controll of the lence as the lence does not have any button.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

You turn it on and off from within the camera.

I got this lens with a a6000 as a first setup for outdoor photography. Haven’t gotten it yet tho.

@DustinAbbottTWI

Жыл бұрын

Enjoy!

I wonder how this compares to the Fuji 70-300mm especialy at the longer focal ranges, they can both be had at a very similar price.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

I wouldn't be surprised if the Fuji is a bit sharper (much smaller zoom ratio), but the Tamron is pretty strong.

@el_fucko

Жыл бұрын

​@@DustinAbbottTWI I've owned both at the same time, and the Fuji positively demolishes the 18-300 in its zoom range. As it should, mind you, as it's a completely different, much more specialized lens, but it really isn't a matter of it being a _bit_ sharper.

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?

@DustinAbbottTWI

Жыл бұрын

I’ve been scheduled in the past to review one of the RX cameras, but I’ve never actually done a review yet.

Hi Dustin, I like you videos. can you tell me what that tripod is ? on the table ,tamron 18-300mm review !

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

Sure - it's this one: bhpho.to/3vL8YWy

@turdboman

2 жыл бұрын

thak you

Hi Dustin, is this lens usefull for my FF Sony A7C?

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

Not particularly. You'll have to shoot in APS-C mode, so that limits you to quite low resolution on the a7C. The Tamron 28-200mm RXD is the better choice for your A7C

would this lens be usable for shooting soccer matches? i tried with my 85 prime but obviously not enough reach.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

So long as they are well lit, yes.

Hi Dustin. Talking about sharpness, What do you think is the sharpest lens? The 18-300 or the 28-200 (using it on an APS-C camera) Thank you so much.

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

I would say the 28-200 is the sharper lens.

@sebastianmartinezsantos5289

2 жыл бұрын

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you Dustin for answering

@sebastianmartinezsantos5289

2 жыл бұрын

@@DustinAbbottTWIBut do you think that difference it's significant? Because on the apsc lens I have OSS and a wider field of view, but the full frame option has a wider aperture and it's sharper. I don't know what to choose! hahaha

@braheemace

2 жыл бұрын

@@DustinAbbottTWIHi... which would best suit the Sony alpha A74 full frame mirrorless camera ...18-300 or 28-200 for travel, modeling and just random😅 shots Thank you so much

@NISDAOfficial

9 ай бұрын

@@sebastianmartinezsantos5289 I am in same confusion. Which one should I buy for my a6400 ? 18-300 or 28-200 ?

Really wish there was a comparison with the 70-350. I'm wondering if I should sell my 70-350 for this?

@mateuszrybka7658

2 жыл бұрын

exactly what I thought! :)

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

That really depends on your shooting goals. This lens won't be as good a performer optically or in tracking for action. It's a multi-purpose lens, while the 70-350 is more of a specialist lens.

@tanmaysakpalofficial

10 ай бұрын

​@@DustinAbbottTWIdoes the extra 50mm on Sony make a significant difference on the reach?

between this tamron 18-300 and sigma 17-50 mm f2.8 which is the best one?

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

That's too open ended a question. Best one for what? The Tamron is about twice as large physically, but also has a zoom range that is more than 5x broader. It's going to be more versatile. The Sigma is compact and has that fast maximum aperture. That's going to be the better choice for other situations. You've got to choose what your priorities are.

how does the optics compare to the 18-400mm (adapted) ?

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

This lens is better optically.

tanmron 18-300 or xc 50-230! which one has better image quality

@DustinAbbottTWI

Жыл бұрын

I lean towards the Tamron.

Would you recommend this for full frame Sony, like a7 rii?

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

Not really. The Tamron 28-200 for full frame makes more sense.

@avijitbhattacharya5528

2 жыл бұрын

@@DustinAbbottTWI Much thanks 🙏🏽

Would this be a good lens to get pics of a high school band member on a football field? I have a Sony a6100 and would like to get away from the kit lenses. The 55-210 is not that great.

@DustinAbbottTWI

6 күн бұрын

It will definitely give you some reach. A superzoom lens like this isn't as sharp as some lenses with smaller zoom ranges, but the image quality should definitely at least match the 55-210 while giving you much more flexibility in the focal lengths.

@jasondotj

6 күн бұрын

@@DustinAbbottTWI great thanks for the feedback!

I'm from Bolivia and I never seen that old 10k bill 😅

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

It is a very old one!

Imagine if this was f4 constant

@DustinAbbottTWI

2 жыл бұрын

It would be much, much bigger.