answers: 106

  1. CheBe
    05.02.2024

    Plastic-fantastic-soap.
    Maybe I was unlucky, but my Tamron 18-200 showed the limit of a photographer’s disappointment and remained for me the standard of what a lens should not be :-)
    Although my negative impression may be the result of switching from the Sony 828 with its Zeiss 28-200 2-2.2 to the Nikon D7000 for which I wanted the maximum zoom for the minimum money. “You shouldn’t be chasing cheapness, priest.”
    Problems with working with Nikon AF, he missed all the time, it was simply impossible for them to “lead” any bird. New from the store, but in a matter of months something in it became loose and began to make noise like a rattle. Sharpness is only possible if you press it down a couple of stops, but even this did not save from soap in the focal range of more than 100mm. At 200mm there was just useless glass. With all this set there is also a torn side and a fade to yellowness. Tamron is a respected company, but even an old woman can get screwed, this “lens” is only good on paper.
    I got rid of it by selling it for a third of the store price without regretting the lost money, since the number of lost frames was simply going through the roof.
    It's a rare case that my review is categorically abusive.

    After it, I had Tamrons 17-50 and 70-300, which left a much better impression, especially 17-50, I suddenly saw the light :-).

    Reply

  2. Load more comments ...

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer