For the opportunity review lens Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 (IF) Aspherical LD XR DiII Macro A14 many thanks to the company http://www.prophoto.ua/, the official representative of Tamron in Ukraine.
Review Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 (IF) Aspherical LD XR DiII Macro A14
A short digression into Tamron's super-zoom line of SLR cameras with an APS-C sensor:
- Model A14 Tamron AF 18-200 mm 1: 3.5-6.3 (IF) Aspherical LD XR DiII Macro, February 2005. Country of origin Japan or China. The Pentax version has a metal mount; for Nikon / Canon / Sony / Minolta, the mount is plastic. In March 2008, an improved model appears for Nikon cameras Tamron model A14 NII with built-in focus motor, focus mode switch, 8 microprocessor pins and metal mount. Most likely lenses Sony AF DT 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 и minolta AF DT 18-200mm F3.5-6.3D use the same optical scheme and are copies of it.
- Model B018 Tamron AF 18-200 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VCAugust 2015.
- Model A18 Tamron AF 18-250 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical [IF] Macro, September 2006. Country of origin Japan or China. In December 2007 an improved model appears for Nikon cameras Tamron model A18 NII with built-in focus motor, focus mode switch and 8 microprocessor pins. Most likely lenses Sony AF DT 3.5-6.3 / 18-250 и SMC Pentax-DA 1: 3.5-6.3 18-250mm AL [IF] и Samsung 18-250 1:3.5-6.3 use the same optical scheme and are copies of it.
- Model B003 Tamron AF 18-270 mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Di II LD [IF] Aspherical VC MacroJuly 2008.
- Model B008 Tamron AF 18-270 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD, December 2010. Most likely the lens SMC Pentax-DA 1: 3.5-6.3 18-270mm ED SDM use the same optical design.
- Model B008TS Tamron AF 18-270 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZDSeptember 2016.
- Model B016 Tamron AF 16-300 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Macro, February 2014.
- Model B028 Tamron 18-400 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLDJune 2017.
There is still PROMASTER DIGITAL XR EDO AF Aspherical LD (IF) 18-200 mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Macrowhich is a model Tamron model a14 under the brand Promaster.
Two lenses for mirrorless cameras stand separately:
- Model C001 Tamron Microphone 14-150 mm F / 3.5-5.8 Di III, black or silver, June 2014, for cameras with Micro 4/3 mount
- Model B011 Tamron 18-200 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di III VC, black or silver, December 2011, for cameras with Sony E mount and Canon EOS M
- Model B061 Tamron 18-300 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di III-A VC VXD (E+X) [Model B061], July 2021, for Sony E and FujiFilm X
The lens came to me brand new, right from the printed box. It is always a pleasure to work with new equipment.
The lens can be found with two, slightly different, designations: Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 and Tamron AF 18-200mm 1:3.5-6.3. This lens can be purchased for Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Sony cameras. I have a 'Canon' version and I used this lens for the review with Canon 350D.
The Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 is a compact, versatile 11x zoom lens. In the name a lot of different abbreviations:
- AF - the presence of automatic focusing due to the built-in motor.
- 18-200 mm is the focal length of the lens. EGF Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 on Canon APS-C cameras is 28,8-320mm. The zoom ratio is easy to calculate on your own, a sufficient larger number, which is responsible for the focal length of the lens, is divided by a smaller one. As a result, 200/18=11.11.
- f / 3.5-6.3 - relative aperture of the lens. The lens can use a maximum aperture of F / 3.5 at 18mm focal length and F / 6.3 at 200mm focal length. The lens cannot boast of good aperture.
- IF (Internal Focusing) - internal focusing.
- aspherical - indicates the presence of aspherical elements in the optical system of the lens.
- LD (Low Dispersion) - indicates the presence of special low-dispersion elements.
- XR (Extra Refractive Index) - elements with a high refractive index. They can be used to make such compact lenses.
- DII - the lens is only suitable for cropped cameras, use on full-frame cameras is not recommended :)
- Macro - 'pretentious' prefix about the presence of a macro mode. Currently, the 'Macro' prefix is molded on almost all lenses that can shoot small objects at least a little. You can look in the section about designations of lenses of different manufacturers.
The optical design consists of 15 elements in 13 groups, some of which are just 'LD', 'XR' and 'Aspherical' elements.
Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 at 200mm
At the lens fast enough auto focus... The autofocus motor built into the lens is noisy and is analogous to Canon MM (Micro Motor). The lens has an 'AF-M' focus mode switch ring. In autofocus mode 'AF', manual focus override is not available, in order to focus manually, be sure to switch the lens to mode 'M'. The focusing ring is rubberized and located in front of the lens. The focus ring rotates approximately 60 degrees. This small angle of rotation of the focusing ring is likely to achieve fast automatic focusing. Despite the small travel of the focusing ring, focusing manually was not difficult for me.
It is very pleasant that the lens has internal focusing and the front lens does not rotate when zooming. When you use the lens at 200mm focal length, the minimum focusing distance is 45 cm, which allows you to shoot macro with an increase of approximately 1: 3,7. There is also a focus distance scale on the lens.
But with aperture the lens let us down a little. Usually inexpensive zoom lenses have a variable aperture F / 3.5-5.6, and in this case everything is a little worse - F / 3.5-6.3. Maximum aperture F / 5.6 is available at 70-135mm focal lengths, but at 135-200mm will have to be limited to f / 6.3. The difference between F / 5.6 and F / 6.3 is 1/4 stop. Many modern SLR cameras in their instructions indicate support for lenses with aperture F / 5.6 and above. This limitation is associated with the automatic phase focusing system. In fact, according to the instructions, many cameras will have problems focusing at the maximum aperture of F / 6.3. In fact, I did not notice any problems with focusing.
Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 with clad hood
The lens has an aperture with 7 blades. Its weight is 400 g (e.g. Nikon 18-200mm VR weighs 160 g more). The lens has a zoom lock - the 'Lock' button, which allows you to lock the lens position at 18mm focal length. My brand new Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 did not spontaneously change the focal length, but for some reason I am sure that over time the lens trunk will "take on a life of its own." The lens is well assembled, but it has plastic mountand the inscription 'Made in China' is not very encouraging. The hood and lids are made in the Philippines. Blend hood not very large and dresses backwards, in this position it does not interfere with the zoom, but blocks access to the focus ring
My experience
The lens lacks an image stabilizer, and aperture F / 6.3 is not happy. Stabilizer version Tamron 18-270 mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Di II LD (IF) Aspherical VC Macro B003E much more convenient to use. I shot on a sunny day, and excerpt at F / 6.3 and ISO 100 ranged from 1/200 to 1/500 second, this is enough to avoid grease when shooting handheld... So I don't think F / 6.3 is too much of a problem compared to F / 5.6. Usually, such a lens serves as a good travel zoom - it is very convenient to use this lens when traveling. wide range of focal lengths... Also, such lenses are bought by people who want to have one lens for all occasions. And the lens has a very nice price tag, about $ 200, because 'native' lenses of this level (usually with a stabilizer) are several times more expensive.
Prices for the Tamron 18-200mm F / 3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) lens in popular online stores can look at this link.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 (IF) is completely worth the money and for this money you can make a good upgrade after a whale lens of the class 18-55 / 3,5-5,6. I would even recommend Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 as the first lens for the CZK.
Sample Photos
Everything is filmed on Canon 350D. At 18mm, barrel distortion and strong vignetting are noticeable. The lens easily copes with back and side light, has a good contrast. You can observe blooming (bright purple spots on contrasting details) and you can not do without aberrations. The sharpness in the center of the image is level, but the edges are not all that good. The image as a whole pleased me and even surprised when used at 200mm. See for yourself:
The parameters of the photo in the review:
On camera JPEG L, high quality. Long exposure noise reduction has been turned off. Parameters: Contrast Correction - 0, Sharpness - 0, Saturation - 0, Hue - 0. Used white balance: 'Auto', 'Daylight', 'Shade', 'Fluorescent'. Photos have been reduced to 2048px by 1363px (roughly 3MP) using FastStone Photo Resizer 3.0, and data from EXIF... When reducing the size of the photos, a quality equal to 80% of the original was used, the compression method was Lanczos3.
Alternatives
Below is a list of all hyper-zooms for SLR or mirrorless cameras with an APS-C sensor and a range of focal lengths greater than or equal to the classic 18-200 mm.
Tamron (different mounts):
- Model A14 Tamron 18-200/3.5-6.3 AF (IF) Aspherical LD XR DiII Macro, February 2005. Country of manufacture Japan or China. The version for Pentax cameras has a metal mount, for Nikon / Canon / Sony / Minolta the mount is plastic. In March 2008, an improved Tamron Model appears for Nikon cameras. A14 NII with built-in focus motor, focus mode switch, 8 microprocessor pins and metal mount.
- Model B018 Tamron 18-200/3.5-6.3 AF Di II VCAugust 2015.
- Model B011 Tamron 18-200 mm F/3.5-6.3 Di III VC, black or silver, December 2011, for mount mirrorless cameras Sony E и Canon EOS M
- Model A18 Tamron 18-250/3.5-6.3 AF Di II LD Aspherical [IF] Macro, September 2006. Country of origin Japan or China. In December 2007, an improved model appears for Nikon cameras Tamron model A18 NII with built-in focus motor, focus mode switch and 8 microprocessor pins.
- Model B003 Tamron 18-270/3.5-6.3 AF Di II LD [IF] Aspherical VC MacroJuly 2008.
- Model B008 Tamron 18-270/3.5-6.3 AF Di II VC PZD, December 2010. Country of origin China or Vietnam.
- Model B008TS Tamron 18-270/3.5-6.3 AF Di II VC PZDSeptember 2016.
- Model B016 Tamron 16-300/3.5-6.3 AF Di II VC PZD Macro, February 2014.
- Model B028 Tamron 18-400/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD, June 2017.
Promaster (various mounts):
- PROMASTER 18-200/3.5-6.3 DIGITAL XR EDO AF Aspherical LD (IF) Macrocopy Tamron model a14 under the Promaster brand. Japanese assembly
Sigma (different mounts):
- Sigma 18-200 mm/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC, February 2005.
- Sigma 18-200/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC (+ -HSM) OS (Optical Stabilizer)September 2006 velvet or smooth black body. The HSM motor is only available on Nikon camera lenses.
- Sigma 18-200/3.5-6.3 II Zoom DC HSM OS (Optical Stabilizer)October 2011.
- Sigma 18-200/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM MACRO | C (Contemporary, Optical Stabilizer), January 2014.
- Sigma 18-250/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC HSM OS (Optical Stabilizer)January 2009
- Sigma 18-250/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC Macro HSM OS (Optical Stabilizer)June 2012.
- Sigma 18-300/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM MACRO | C (Contemporary, Optical Stabilizer)September 2014.
Quantaray (different mounts):
- Quantaray 18-200/3.5-6.3 Dio Multi-Coated, copy of Sigma 18-200mm/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC (2005) branded as 'Quantaray'
- Quantaray 18-200/3.5-6.3 Dio OS (+-HSM) Multi-Coated, copy Sigma 18-200/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC (+-HSM) OS (2006) under the banner of 'Quantaray'.
Nikon (F):
- Nikon 18-200/3.5-5.6G DX VRNovember 2005.
- Nikon 18-200/3.5-5.6GII DX VRJuly 2009.
- Nikon 18-300/3.5-5.6G DX VR, June 2012.
- Nikon 18-300/3.5-6.3G DX VRApril 2014.
Sony ('A' or 'E'):
- Sony 18-200/ 3.5-6.3 AF DT, A mount, most likely uses an optical design Tamron model a14.
- minolta 18-200/3.5-6.3AF DT Dmount A is likely to use an optical circuit Tamron a14
- Sony 18-250/3.5-6.3 AF DT, A mount, since 2007, most likely uses Tamron Model A18 optical design.
- Sony 18-200/3.5-6.3 OSS, E-mount, May 2010
- Sony 18-200/3.5-6.3 OSS LE, E-mount, May 2012
- Sony 18-200/3.5-6.3 PZ OSS, E-mount, September 2012
Hasselblad (Sony E):
- Hasselblad E 3.5-6.3/18-200 OSS copy Sony 18-200/3.5-6.3 OSS, September 2012
Pentax (K):
- Pentax 18-250/3.5-6.3 AL SMC DA [IF], October 2007, most likely uses Tamron Model A18 optical design.
- Pentax 18-270/3.5-6.3 ED SMC DA SDM, September 2012, most likely uses an optical design Tamron model b008.
- Samsung 18-250/ 3.5-6.3, with a Pentax KAF2 mount, 2008, (most likely uses the Tamron Model A18 optical design.
Canon (EFS):
- Canon 18-200/3.5-5.6 IS Zoom Lens EF-S (Image Sbabilizer), August 2008.
Samsung (NX):
- Samsung 18-200/3.5-5.6 ED OIS i-Function, Samsung NX mount
Conclusions:
Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 (IF) Aspherical LD XR DiII Macro A14 - 11x compact superzoom, has good price / performance ratio... I was pleasantly surprised by the fast internal focusing and good sharpness in the center of the frame throughout the entire focal length range. Can serve as a replacement for the standard kit 18-55 / 3,5-5,6.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
“The lens is only suitable for
cropped cameras, use on
full-frame cameras are not recommended :) ”- not just not recommended, there is a possibility that the mirror will cling. I do not know about this instance, but there is such a warning about the native EF-S.
He will not cling to the mirror, but he will give such a vignette, especially at a wide angle, that you will have to cut out the central part, thereby turning the full frame into a crop. Sigma is the same story. In an emergency, it can help out.
I report: on FF sim glass can be used from 100mm, or sprinkled with scissors. Actually this makes no sense to use it)
I hope that Profoto 24-70mm will provide you with a review for review. Very interesting glass.
I myself wonder :)
Tell me, what is better to take d7000 with whale 18-105, or to buy this lens?
Thank you in advance :)
If in the case of 18-55 I would recommend this Tamron, then in the case of 18-105 VR it is difficult for me to tell what will be really better. On the one hand, Nikon has an image stabilizer, but on the other hand, its maximum focal length is two times shorter.
18-105 definitely. There is not only a stub, but also a metal bayonet, a better construction, a silent AF. And while 105mm isn't 200mm, it's always best to use your native lens.
I shot my first two years on 18-70 Nikkor (although you could have taken 18-135) and did not complain about the lack of a television range.
Soon, Nikon will release 18-140 / 3.5-5.6 VR, as I understand it, to replace 18-105. Well, he will definitely cover your needs for the first time.
The 18-105mm f / 3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX has a plastic mount ...
Hmm, something with a bayonet mount I missed. Badly remembered his first acquaintance with him
18-105 everyone is better, so tamron and sell cheaper. In my case, it was 6000 versus 7500.
dealt with this lens from a friend with nikon d5000 and he doesn’t have sharpness on open apertures, but here in the review everything is all right or did not pay attention to this
There is a very wide variation in quality - you need to try several copies. Plus there is another nuance. Usually a camera with a whale lens is bought and they are adjusted to each other. As a result, the same third-party lens can show one result on one camera, and on the other - completely different in sharpness. But given the cost of this Tamron, there is no point in re-adjusting, so all that remains is the selection for your carcass.
So why are they aligned for each other? Then a whale kit would be more expensive than carcass and glass combined. So there’s nothing to invent.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7333489584/variation-facts-and-fallacies - here's a good article on why lenses and cameras don't fit together.
Regarding the mutual alignment of the carcass and glass, information came across repeatedly and even confirmed in practice - “native” whales on the camera gave better results than strangers. I went to look for real confirmation - I didn't find it, everyone refers to rumors. Someone categorically claims that this is so, someone says that nothing is checked at all, someone says that the carcass and glass are adjusted according to the standard separately. Research needs to be done.
When, during the photo session, the wife dropped the FA from the tripod, the bayonet (plastic, che) died, and the same whale was put from the next carcass - it washed good and caught the focus very badly. Photographed on Boots. The next day, we tried again to take a soap whale for filming - on closer inspection - dirty lenses and a dangling focusing ring. I rubbed the lenses - and it's awesome! it worked! the quality is about the same, considering that the replacement whale was killed. The problem remained with the ring)).
Using this objective for several months. The sharpness on open diaphragms is very frustrating, and of course the stabilizer is very lacking.
In my opinion, the only advantage of this lens is the price. If possible, it is better to take the native Nikon 18-200.
Native Nikon 18-200 will cost 900 bucks. Weak Consolation)))))))
:)) Professionals buy their own top glasses for professional cameras and hand them over to the service for adjustment :). And all the same after that these lenses will not give the same “cinematic quality”. What can we say about the lens, in which the manufacturer has invested (cost) 50 USD? (this is on the way to the buyer, he is already picking up the price of 200 USD).
Guys! I read the comments like this, and especially on the Nikonist forums, I just bastard…. There is a feeling that a bunch of people are only doing what they do not take pictures, but buy a camera and look for jambs in it, test autofocus and the like ... What happens to people in general? For a long time I had a Zenith E, which had one photodiode above the lens as an exposure meter and did not have a stabilizer and autofocus, and I do not remember that in three years I would have had at least one incorrectly exposed, blurry or with focus in the wrong place I directed .... And before that there was a FED-3 without a light meter and I set the shutter-aperture manually, by eye, and for 4 years I don’t remember a single frame overexposed or underexposed ... And now all such “cool” cameras, with cool exposure metering, autofocus and everything not this way…. It's just that marketers have already screwed up people's brains with such cool names of common functions that it's just a kick-ass ...
I will support the opinion of AA, “There is a feeling that a lot of people are doing nothing but not taking pictures, but buying a camera and looking for jambs in it, testing autofocus and the like…”.
It's all true! And Arkady is a fine fellow - the assessment of practicality and artistry carry more meaning than the comparison “in parrots”!
guys really why do we need all these comparisons, let's do an ART shooting at a tin can and be happy, by the way, who doesn’t know how to do this, it’s painted on the site and everything’s shown so good luck
serghs, for artistic photography, light, composition, and now post-processing give 90%, the contribution of the lens here is minimal, unless you shoot for frank junk. You can raise the sharpness and blur the background. Here, lenses are still compared among themselves, but the subjective perception of one person serves as the basis for comparison, in contrast to purely synthetic tests.
Roman, did you mean me or the previous (in front of you) who spoke? As for "cans" and "outright junk", I did not say anything about it. And in general, throwing words is so simple nowadays, and what meaning do you put into these words - that's another question, most people generally speak first, and then think. Would you tell the author of the blog that his D40 is a "tin can", otherwise Arkady probably did not reach such "high thoughts" ...
I fully support! It seems that any shoals for many are much more important than the shooting itself. And as for the telephoto, I will say this - you should not take it without a stabilizer. I have Nikkor 55-300 and without a stub for 150-300 without lubrication from hands in not bright light it is difficult to remove. This budget glass costs $ 100 more, but it's worth it, and even lighter by 300mm. Tamron's versatility is captivating, yes! I was holding my native Nikkor 18-300 in my hands and even made a couple of shots for them, Versatility - Super! I can't judge the quality of the pictures, I looked only at the camera, but if it turns out to be no worse than 55-300, then for an amateur you cannot imagine a better one. Dear true, dog ...!
Ha!! I also had a “Fedya” in my childhood, and a tank for developing, and a “Tavria” for printing !! And "unibrom" and "birch" and "bromportrait", and all hands in ulcers. even a glossy was !!, epa mom, what an ancient I am, although born in 1975)))))))) since then 25 years I have not taken a camera in my hands, except for soap dishes in Turkey)))) And so I decided to revive the past, bought Nikon 5200, began to study materiel and went nuts ……. How everything is running))))) and the stub is not a stub for you, and it “lathers”, and it “makes noise” at ISO, and there is little light, and the “glass” is hard)))) you can be stunned))))) Everything with DSLRs- all "professionals". Whoever is wrong, stick your hands in the battery and straighten it, and you will be happy !!!
The technical side of photography is the basis for artistic and other photography. Any more or less serious shooting involves the use of a camera, lens, flash and auxiliary equipment at their extreme capabilities, so, for example, the lens is interesting with aperture and stub - you shoot in search of “artistry” (“at the limit”) at an aperture of 2,8 and exposure time 40, 30 ... before lubrication.
This is where you squeeze their capabilities out of the camera and lens, and this is where the accuracy of the autofocus operation, sharpness (the ability to control it (DOF)) and so on are acutely manifested. "Jambs". If you shoot at apertures of 5,6; eight; 8 ..., extracts 11; 250 ... and ISO 500, and then put the image under the “shop masks”, fixing it with a programmed sharpening, then of course it is easier this way, but this path leads FROM artistic photography. A camera, adjusted with a high-aperture and sharp lens, is a tool for creation, for transforming thoughts into a real artistic concept, for obtaining wonderful forms and compositions from rough rough stone.
“If there is a flash…. shutter speed values 30, 40 and so on until smearing ”- this is no longer artistry, this is some kind of masochism.
I do not think this is masochism, I myself use this technique in poor lighting, but if I want to get the minimum depth of field for this case, and given that I have a D200 machine (noisy infection), I can’t significantly ISO, so I have to get out
in order to have a minimum DOF - you need to OPEN the diaphragm.
in order not to run out of ISO - a flash is used, which is what we are talking about.
so why lower the shutter speed then ???
It should be based on “artistry”, and the technical side should be seen only as a tool to achieve it. If the basis is the "technical side" - one gets one "self-satisfaction" from photographic equipment. Many recognized photographic masterpieces were shot on monocles and other “wretched” technique and no “limits” interfered.
Specifically for glass, I myself use this, but the quality does not shine, but in this price range there is simply no alternative to it. It may not be worth taking instead of the kit 18-55 (if a further “upgrade” is planned), but instead of a bundle of “double kit”, definitely. A good option for Sony cameras, due to the presence of a stub in the carcass.
Bred here a forum of concepts)
Specifically on the glass: if there is no money and there is no alternative and you need it right now, then you can take it .. He will quickly get bored and want something more serious (even more if you are lucky with the copy .. mine often lathers .. but not always) ... better wait .. save up and take something brighter .. well, or such a blat, but choose from a dozen pieces .. aa .. also .. pochial forums .. they say after a while some of these glasses begin to specifically wash half of the image .. so DO NOT THROW and DO NOT SHAKE .. or you will get a poop ..
It seems Arkady went on vacation :)
Arkady. But are you planning a review of the TAMRON AF 18-270mm F / 3,5 -6,3 Di II VC PZD? He is certainly more expensive, but there is a stub :)
take or not take, that’s the question? carcass d5000, there is a whale 18-55 and 35mm 1.8g. I think I’ll take such a tamron of 18-200, and sell the whale. do you think people are worth it?
In this case, you shouldn't sell the whale. Primarily due to stabilization. In the second, the whale is more compact, its trunk does not leave. And you never know what you don't like at 18-200, you can easily sell it.
I see that the comments are four years old, I am writing to those people who will face a similar question
I use this lens on a canon eos 550d. when zooming beyond 135mm, the diaphragm remains open at 5.6 - up to the limit of 200mm, that is, I can take a photo of 200mm with F / 5.6 ... but everywhere it says that the maximum is 6.3. can you tell what is the reason?
if you really have this lens, then these are just problems with the lens chip, third-party manufacturers often have such jambs.
Thank you for your reply. in principle, I suspected this
First of all THANKS for your work, for objective assessments. I shoot with a Pentax K-r camera, a Tamron 18-200 lens. On fr 22-24 - architecture - “draws”, on 70-110 the diaphragm-7-8 is rather sharp, on 200- and open- you have to try ... In general, a real replacement for the whale 18-55, distortions and chromaticity are not fatal. Focusing problems - most likely due to the camera. Apparently I will switch to K-5 (2) - or K-5 (2s), unfortunately I do not understand the difference - there is no filter. And I like Sonya 77, but I don’t have any use in our city ... as well as Pentaxes ..
Together with the camera in the bargain they gave 18-200, fotik D80. In general, for the price that I got it - it's a gift. I would not say that he is better than 18-55. At the same focal lengths, 18-55 gives less distortion and generally gives a sharper picture. But in general, the lens is interesting. The first time I shot them was a couple of days after buying a hockey game. During the breaks, he filmed girls-dancers by 150-200 mm. The lighting was ... in general, it was almost nonexistent. Running lights, flickering, it couldn't be worse, it's almost impossible to shoot in M mode. During shooting, I immediately deleted about half of the frames. In principle, understanding the dark nature of the lens and too long exposure times due to low illumination (the girls danced, the hockey players did not pose either), the quality surprised me. Out of 150 shots shot there, I managed to find two dozen correctly exposed and sharp. Of these, 5-6 pieces were of quite decent content and, in general, went into a personal photo album. Considering that the D80 is not strong at high ISO, to put it mildly, I was pleased with the results. With a newer carcass, the quality is clearly higher. On the D5100, the same lens produced even more usable shots. It's a pity you have to focus manually. It cannot stand comparisons with my Nikon 70-300, but it does not pretend to be.
But for a trip to the sea, he is the first candidate. The most versatile focal lengths, minuscule size and weight - that's what will definitely help on the trip. In addition, the aperture ratio under the southern sun will clearly be enough for him. During outings or to mass events, I take it for the second carcass almost always (except for very dark places - for them I have to take the good old fifty dollars). It is worth noting that I also use it indoors, but with a flash. In a dark bowling alley, with a manual youngnuo 560 or Nikon's 700, the shots are excellent. You can safely clamp the aperture to the desired values and get decent photos. In total, a set of youngnuo 560, an old Nikon D80 and this lens is enough for almost everything that can be photographed indoors. There is a wide angle for shooting everyone at the table and a TV range that allows you to photograph the far corners of the premises. At 100mm, you can even take an interesting portrait with bokeh. The price for the entire used set will be about $ 330. For the price of a used 3100 with a whale, you get a lot more. There is a macro in it, but it is not particularly macro. In any case, macro rings give more interesting frames in my opinion.
Making a conclusion I will say - the lens is from the category of those that will always come in handy. A beginner will understand whether he needs a teled type or shirik, an advanced amateur will be able to squeeze all the juice out of the lens, and a novice professional will not mind if this lens is covered. It takes up little space in the bag. I shot them both in frost and snow and even in light rain - everything was fine, there were no problems. And the trunk, yes, leaves, but this is not such a terrible problem, especially since there is a latch-stopper for 18 mm.
Thanks for the comment!
And to the author of the review! Excellent photos, I really liked how the nature turned out, I want myself such an lens for shooting the landscape and the sea on sunny days and with a tripod ...
The backlight fountain really liked. I’ll probably have to take this glass for vacation))
Hello. Help me choose a lens for Nikon d3100. There is only whale so far. Which is better to take: Tamron AF 17-50 mm F2.8 XR Di II VC Nikon or Tamron AF 18-200mm F / 3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Nikon F ??? For travel photography, portraits and just for family use. Thank you in advance.
recently acquired TAMRON AF 80-210 F4.5-5.6.
what can you say about him ??
People tell me what is better to buy? There is a BU, but little used, in Nikon 18-135mm cases-boxes, they give it for 5000r. And in the store, in the singular, i.e. without the possibility of brute force and selection Tamron 18-200 for 6700. He broke his head. On the weekend of the city, the edge must be replaced by the staff 18-55. I accidentally bought a Nikon D200 for just 6500r in a box with a mileage of 20 thousand. I'm glad as an elephant, I don't let go of my hands, the colors are super, but I urgently wanted to replace the staff. Help out with advice, good people!
recently rode in a scooter case in a bag dressed in 600D) from a blow (flew into a hole) one petal of a bayonet broke off .. no one knows where to find a replacement for a bayonet .. or a corpse of the lens ??) thanks
I have a copy for A mount (Sony). The bayonet mount is all the same metal, there is a plastic overlay from the top (take a closer look).
PS quite a decent lens for all occasions for cheap. The trunk is being developed over time, here the author correctly suggests. Aperture can be corrected in the camera RO. It’s not recommended to take pictures with one’s hands after the start of sunset (in operating time, current with a tripod)
Hello! What do you recommend buying between the Canon EOS 1100D (Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 (IF) Aspherical LD XR DiII Macro A14) and the Nikon D5100 Kit with the usual (18-55mm).
Canon, but not 1000d, but something higher. Better older, but more professional.
There is no need to compare whales with this noble piece of iron. Yesterday I received a cheap lens by mail with a torn aperture cable. Disassembled. The lens is actually very complex, apparently the internal focusing makes itself felt. The entire optical part, and these are 5 pieces (I do not remember exactly) tubes that carry out the movement of the lenses along complex trajectories are most likely made of anodized titanium, because there is no weight at all and rings. Aluminum alloys do not ring. The optical design is pretty simple - front lens, focuser, rear lens. Front rear diaphragm. I don’t recognize glues, so like this. The only thing that confuses me is the main ring and the plastic bayonet. There is one more top guide - it is also plastic. If they were made of titanium too, it would be much more stylish. The back part and from this the effect of the vacuum cleaner are incorporated into the design. The lens travel is too long and there will always be air leakage, even with a fixed rear lens. Only lenses with internal zoom and focus will not have a vacuum cleaner effect, and this automatically makes lenses of a large size (according to the size of the maximum zoom). That is, pull out your tamron and see what the size of the non-vacuum lens will be. example 70-200 2.8. The fact that the trunk extends is too little lubricant and too liquid. And there are about 100 lubrication points. If it was lubricated with lithol, like helios, it would work like helios.
Uf-f-f ... but in general “there will always be more good cameras and lenses than good photographers” (from someone's aphorisms under the photo).
Good evening. Someone can open the eyes of a teapot in photography ... Which lens is better, this one or Tamron LD DI AF 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 Tele-Macro (1: 2) in terms of its technical characteristics and why? Thanks in advance.
Stas, the issue of lenses has nothing to do with photography.
These lenses (18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3 and 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6) are different enough to make one of them better.
From what they have in common: Macro, one and the second have it. Both without stabilizers (for Sony anyway). Both are plastic. Both are cheap. Both lenses are dark and require good lighting.
They have different focal lengths. A focal length of 18 mm gives a good angle, allowing you to shoot in confined spaces. On a 70-300mm lens this will not work.
At a focus of 300 mm, you can (theoretically) remove a bird sitting on a distant and tall tree, but you need a clear sunny day and, perhaps, a tripod.
In the middle ranges of the focal length, both work well.
18-200 universal (for every day, on an excursion, with family to the park), which allows (under certain conditions) to quickly and fairly high-quality take photos, both in long and short focus. Used only on cameras with an incomplete sensor.
70-300 telephoto lens. It is used on cameras with both a full (full frame) and an incomplete (crop) matrix.