Review of Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Di II LD [IF] Aspherical VC Macro B003E for Canon

According provided by Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Di II LD [IF] Aspherical VC Macro B003E lens (for Canon cameras) many thanks to Alexander.

Review of Tamron AF 18-270mm f / 3.5-6.3 Di II LD

Review of Tamron AF 18-270mm f / 3.5-6.3 Di II LD

A short digression into Tamron's super-zoom line of SLR cameras with an APS-C sensor:

  1. 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.
  2. Model B018 Tamron AF 18-200 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VCAugust 2015.
  3. 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.
  4. Model B003 Tamron AF 18-270 mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Di II LD [IF] Aspherical VC MacroJuly 2008.
  5. 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.
  6. Model B008TS Tamron AF 18-270 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZDSeptember 2016.
  7. Model B016 Tamron AF 16-300 mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Macro, February 2014.
  8. 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:

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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

Only Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Ø72 Di II VC B003 is written on the lens itself Assembled in china, the other prefixes in the lens name are taken from the inscriptions on the box: LD Aspherical (IF) Macro for Canon. What do these strange letters mean, you can find in the review of his younger brother Tamron AF 18-200mm f / 3.5-6.3. Tamron 18-270mm f / 3.5-6.3 exists in various versions: Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax. This lens is only suitable for cropped cameras APS-C type, it is undesirable to use it on expensive full-size cameras.

Sample photo. Macro, raindrops on a leaf

Sample photo. Macro, raindrops on a leaf

It should be pay tribute to Tamron - Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Ø72 Di II VC B003 lens with 15x zoom appeared in summer 2008 years and had the largest zoom ratio for all lenses from SLR cameras. I remember how in 2009 I saw an advertisement for this lens in the Kiev metro, then my friends admired the inscription “zoom ratio 15X”, which was unprecedented at that time. And only after 4 (four!) Years, Nikon was able to release something similar in the face of the Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-300 mm f / 3.5-5.6G ED VR with 17x zoom. Outside the window in 2013, and Canon has not yet been able to repeat the Tamron feat and release either 18-250 or 18-270, I am already silent about 18-300. In 2011, the Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Ø72 Di II VC lens was upgraded to a version with a silent piezoelectric motor. Please do not confuse Tamron 18-270mm f / 3.5-6.3 (model B003E) from this review with the new Tamron AF 18-270mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD (Model B008).

The difference in size of the two versions of Tamron 18-270. The new version is noticeably smaller.

The difference in size of the two versions of Tamron 18-270. The new version is noticeably smaller.

Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Ø72 Di II VC B003 was a very interesting lens. It is large, heavy, with a metal bayonet mount. Despite his huge zoom ratio, he showed a tolerable image quality. Perhaps the secret as a picture from my copy of Tamron 18-270mm f / 3.5-6.3 is that I used a lens on the camera Canon 350D... This model is said to have 'large pixels', making it easier to get a sharp image. In any case, the huge zoom ratio and built-in image stabilization make the Tamron 18-270mm f / 3.5-6.3 a very attractive option in the eyes of many amateur photographers.

Sample photo. After the rain.

Sample photo. After the rain.

The lens is crammed with special optical elements.that are designed to improve image quality. In the optical scheme of the lens, which consists of 18 elements in 13 groups, one element is an AD-type (glass with anomalous scattering), two LD elements (low dispersion glass lenses) and as many as three ASL elements (aspherical elements).

Optical design Tamron AF 18-270mm f / 3.5-6.3 Di II LD [IF] VC macro

Optical design Tamron AF 18-270mm f / 3.5-6.3 Di II LD (IF) VC macro

But with the focusing speed, Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3, Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 let us down a bit. Lens focuses slowly, and even there are some problems with focusing in Live View mode, including when shooting video. I cannot judge how critical the problems with Live View are, since I used Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 only on the camera Canon 350Dthat does not have a live screen mode.

Portrait on the lens

Portrait on the lens

Lens focus internaltherefore, when focusing outside the lens, nothing rotates or moves. The front lens also does not rotate when zooming. The lens has a built-in focus motor that buzzes, it is not analogous to Nikon SWM or Canon USM.

Full-length portrait

Full-length portrait

The lens has an 'AF / MF' focus mode switch. In manual focus mode, the focus ring rotates approximately 45 degrees. The zoom and focus ring are rubberized and comfortable enough. It is very good that at any focal length the minimum focusing distance of the lens is only 49 cm, while at the 270mm focal length, you can shoot macro with a magnification of 1: 3.5. The magnification is weak, but the 'Macro' prefix in the name of the lens is still there. The lens has a focusing distance scale in meters and feet.

Camera view

Camera view

Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 well assembled, weighs a little more than a pound. The diameter of the front filter is rather big, equal to 72mm. The lens looks solid on small amateur mirrors. The trunk of the lens can spontaneously drive out under its own weight. To prevent this from happening, there is a lens zoom lockwhich locks the lens at 18mm. The lens hood comes with a plastic hood that can be worn backwards. True, this blocks access to the focus ring. The hood is small, easy to carry. The quality of photos in the lens hood is not much affected.

This is how Tamron looks on the Nikon camera

This is how Tamron looks on the Nikon camera

Image Stabilizer (VC) I was surprised - it works very, very well. I shot handheld with shutter speeds of 1 / 80s at 270mm focal length without any problems. The stabilizer in Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 really does its job very well. Only the stabilizer makes a slight noise. The lens has a 'VC ON / OFF' switch. The only pity is that the 270mm lens is 'dark' with maximum aperture F / 6.3. In the range from 18 to 200 mm, F / 3.5-5.6 values ​​are available, but from 200 to 270 mm the maximum aperture can only be F / 6.3. Weak aperture may adversely affect focusing accuracy in poor lighting conditions. Anyway, many DSLR cameras are simply not designed to work with optics, the maximum aperture of which is less than F / 5.6. When I was working with the Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3, it focused quite 'tenaciously'.

The work of the stabilizer on the face. Handheld, 270mm 1/30 second

The work of the stabilizer on the face. Handheld, 270mm 1/30 second

Sample Photos

The lens is sharp enough only in the center of the frame, the sharpness is weak. The lens has good contrast. At 270mm you can achieve a pronounced bokeh effect. True, in general, the image does not stand out anything special. All the time I had a lens, it was pouring heavy rain, under such poor lighting the image stabilizer helped me a lot, and I was able to get a couple of photos for review.

The parameters shown in the photo gallery:
All shot on Canon EOS 350D using protective filter Tamron 72mm MC UV Philippines. EGF lens on Canon 350D is 29-432mm (!). On-camera JPEG L, high quality (without any processing). Noise reduction at slow shutter speeds was turned off. Parameters: contrast correction - 0, sharpness - 0, saturation - 0, tone color - 0. Used white balance: 'Auto' and 'Cloudy', 'Daylight', 'Shadow'. Photos have been reduced in size.

Tamron 18-270 with an extended trunk

Tamron 18-270 with an extended trunk

My experience:

I want to add on my own that the lens suffers from the effect of a vacuum cleaner, namely: when zooming, it drives the air inside the camera, which can lead to rapid contamination of the camera matrix. This is not very scary, because many cameras have special systems for cleaning the matrix and systems for distributing the air flow along the mirror shaft of the camera. Usually, amateur photographers want one lens for all occasions and Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 can come to their rescue. However, the higher the zoom ratio, the, in general, the worse the image quality, so you should not expect that Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 will create super-sharp images. Many have a dilemma - this Tamron, or the native 18-200mm f / 3.5-5.6. I would not contact Tamron 18-270mm, as it would be very disappointing if for 500 USD. a low-quality specimen will come across - after all, many people know that from specimen to specimen the quality of budget Tamron walks a lot. Still, if you can find a good one, the Tamron 18-270mm can be a very nice piece of glass in a hobbyist's trunk.

Portrait on the lens

Portrait on the lens

Lens prices 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.

Portrait on Tamron 18-270

Portrait on Tamron 18-270


By alternatives, I mean universal super-zoom lenses for cropped APS-C digital SLRs with a magnification greater than 13X. There are not so many such lenses.

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):

  1. 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.
  2. Model B018 Tamron 18-200/3.5-6.3 AF Di II VCAugust 2015.
  3. 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
  4. 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.
  5. Model B003 Tamron 18-270/3.5-6.3 AF Di II LD [IF] Aspherical VC MacroJuly 2008.
  6. Model B008 Tamron 18-270/3.5-6.3 AF Di II VC PZD, December 2010. Country of origin China or Vietnam.
  7. Model B008TS Tamron 18-270/3.5-6.3 AF Di II VC PZDSeptember 2016.
  8. Model B016 Tamron 16-300/3.5-6.3 AF Di II VC PZD Macro, February 2014.
  9. Model B028 Tamron 18-400/3.5-6.3 Di II VC HLD, June 2017.

Promaster (various mounts):

  1. 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):

  1. Sigma 18-200 mm/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC, February 2005.
  2. 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.
  3. Sigma 18-200/3.5-6.3 II Zoom DC HSM OS (Optical Stabilizer)October 2011.
  4. Sigma 18-200/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM MACRO | C (Contemporary, Optical Stabilizer), January 2014.
  5. Sigma 18-250/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC HSM OS (Optical Stabilizer)January 2009
  6. Sigma 18-250/3.5-6.3 Zoom DC Macro HSM OS (Optical Stabilizer)June 2012.
  7. Sigma 18-300/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM MACRO | C (Contemporary, Optical Stabilizer)September 2014.

Quantaray (different mounts):

  1. 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'
  2. 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):

  1. Nikon 18-200/3.5-5.6G DX VRNovember 2005.
  2. Nikon 18-200/3.5-5.6GII DX VRJuly 2009.
  3. Nikon 18-300/3.5-5.6G DX VR, June 2012.
  4. Nikon 18-300/3.5-6.3G DX VRApril 2014.

Sony ('A' or 'E'):

  1. Sony 18-200/ 3.5-6.3 AF DT, A mount, most likely uses an optical design Tamron model a14.
  2. minolta 18-200/3.5-6.3AF DT Dmount A is likely to use an optical circuit Tamron a14
  3. Sony 18-250/3.5-6.3 AF DT, A mount, since 2007, most likely uses Tamron Model A18 optical design.
  4. Sony 18-200/3.5-6.3 OSS, E-mount, May 2010
  5. Sony 18-200/3.5-6.3 OSS LE, E-mount, May 2012
  6. Sony 18-200/3.5-6.3 PZ OSS, E-mount, September 2012

Hasselblad (Sony E):

  1. Hasselblad E 3.5-6.3/18-200 OSS copy Sony 18-200/3.5-6.3 OSS, September 2012

Pentax (K):

  1. Pentax 18-250/3.5-6.3 AL SMC DA [IF], October 2007, most likely uses Tamron Model A18 optical design.
  2. Pentax 18-270/3.5-6.3 ED SMC DA SDM, September 2012, most likely uses an optical design Tamron model b008.
  3. Samsung 18-250/ 3.5-6.3, with a Pentax KAF2 mount, 2008, (most likely uses the Tamron Model A18 optical design.

Canon (EFS):

  1. Canon 18-200/3.5-5.6 IS Zoom Lens EF-S (Image Sbabilizer), August 2008.

Samsung (NX):

  1. Samsung 18-200/3.5-5.6 ED OIS i-Function, Samsung NX mount


The Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Di II LD (IF) Aspherical VC Macro B003E is a very high zoom lens, making it a lens for all occasions. A lens like this is great for holidays, especially when shooting in good daylight. It has slow internal focusing and an Image Stabilizer that comes in handy when shooting handheld. The image quality is not high, but it is quite suitable for simple amateur tasks.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment:



Comments: 56, on the topic: Review of Tamron 18-270mm 1: 3.5-6.3 Di II LD (IF) Aspherical VC Macro B003E for Canon

  • David

    Judging by the picture good stub)

  • Denis

    So I look at such lenses and think - is there any point? With such apertures, there is no bokeh, you have to raise the ISO, i.e. the advantages of a large matrix are leveled. The dimensions are very, very large, the price is also not the smallest, in my opinion, if you need such versatility, it is easier to buy a good ultrazoom - there the focal range will be higher, the aperture is greater (bokeh will not be worse, I saw), and in general the quality will be comparable; it will fit into the bag instead of the second glass, plus a backup device will work :)

    • Vadim

      In such lenses there is a certain meaning.

      Firstly, they help to seamlessly switch from ultrasounds to mirror technology. Still, the picture is usually more fun, the colors are more natural, the RAWs stretch better.

      Secondly, for a person who did not use fixes or does not want to wear / change them, or does not see the difference in sharpness on his monitor (or when printing), and he is satisfied with such a background, and ... there is still a lot to add here - a set of an uncomplicated camera and similar lens solves all problems for the rest of your life.

      Thirdly, if you put them in a row with whale lenses, they are a good upgrade.

      Fourth, these lenses help fill in the “over-,” “under-,” and “inter-fix holes” in focal lengths and not miss any interesting moment or angle. In my opinion, it is very nice to get out with friends for a photoset with two cameras, one of which (in our case, the D60 with Nikkor AF-S 18-200 VR) has a universal zoom, and the second (D300) has fixes.

      Fifth, these lenses are very interesting from a statistical point of view. Let's say, I think it would be nice to buy a fix, but I'm not sure which one. Then I take my photo library, organize it by the focal lengths used and see that most of the time I photograph at ... mm or least of all I like the way my zoom draws at ... mm.

      PS Judging by my own arguments, the most sense in such lenses should be found by beginners and / or “undecided” photographers who already at this stage wanted a DSLR (my husband gave it, there is nowhere to put money, the image does not allow something easier, etc. .).
      PPS And of course, I wrote from the bottom of my heart, not burdened with thoughts about the cost of the lens. If you count the money, the situation seems a little different :).

      • Denis

        1. RAWs yes, but given the aperture and FR, you will probably have to shoot at high ISO, i.e. the margin for "drawing" from RAW will no longer be the same. If the camera is old (like the EOS 350D), the noise will be strong at high ISOs. If new, multi-megapixel and low-noise, then there will be soap due to imperfect optics.
        2. If a person is satisfied with such a picture, then it is generally not clear why he contacted the DSLR :)
        3. My opinion is that if there is a whale, then it is better to take something from the 70-300 category, without trying to kill two birds with one stone.
        4. The second camera could be an ultrasound, smaller in size and weight, cheaper and practically not inferior in image quality.
        5. Again, the ultrasound would solve this problem, after recalculating the focal length.
        In general, it turns out that this is a lens - a way to turn a DSLR into a simple ultrazoom, while this method is very expensive and cumbersome :)

        • Arkady Shapoval

          A question for those who are discussing, what technique do you call “dark”?

          • Denis

            Probably the same as you. “The only pity is that the 270mm lens is 'dark' with a maximum aperture of F / 6.3. Poor apertures can adversely affect focusing accuracy in low light conditions. ”

            • Arkady Shapoval

              Well, from what number F do you mean “darkness”?

          • Denis

            It depends on what kind of optics, in the sense of focal length. For the wide-angle and 3.5 is darkish, but the tele-range for zooms is less than 5.6, i.e. at least less than the minimum recommended for cameras.

        • Vadim

          1. There is a stub. There will be no problems. ISO 400, and more. It is usually working even on simple cameras. There are situations when, according to the plan, covered diaphragms are needed in low light, and fast shutter speeds are not obtained. In this case, with a stub it will be even more fun than with aperture optics.
          The stock will be decent. In RAW, you can wind up a bit of sharpness. And I’m not saying this just to argue, but as a person who was first given a Nikkor 18-200, and then I started collecting fixes myself.
          Soap will, of course, be one of the compromises that you have to make. But, you know, everything is relative. If a person has not yet seen what a really sharp image is, for him his pictures will be wonderful.
          2. “Mirror” picture almost always differs from fotik with matrix less than usual crop. Especially under imperfect shooting conditions. And for me it was a discovery that many of my acquaintances notice this, who do not really understand the essence of the issue.
          3. Whale whale strife. There are people who need everything at once. There are people whom I would not even advise to change lenses because of congenital curvature, anything can happen ...
          If we talk about the range of focal lengths used, 18-140mm (recently appeared at Nikon) would be completely enough for me.
          4. Disagree. If I have an optics park and my finances allow it, it's just great to have 2 cameras of the same name on hand. How do I attach some creative lens to the ultrazoom? Or Soviet optics? Or the awesome Vega-11U? And in general, there are tons of situations when I don't feel like carrying all my gear with me, and I grab a “tiny handbag” with the D60 and the versatile zoom that I ALREADY have. I do not need a second ultrazoom, a second body is enough for me, and it will cost much cheaper than a non-mirror lens like in the picture.
          5. It turns out that this lens allows the ex-owner of the ultrazoom to move to a qualitatively new level of photography without frustration about “How, there is no huge zoom?”, “He doesn't shoot macro?”. And how much this level will be in demand, and how much the owner is ready to further evolve - this is a big question that will remain open.

          • Denis

            4. It was about the second camera, do not distort. I'm not saying that a SLR is not needed.
            5. Here are the frustrations just the same. Modern ultrasonic minds give greater zoom, this is firstly. At best, the macro here is the same as the ultrasound, and secondly (small-matrix cameras are stronger in macro capabilities, since focusing is easier to do).

          • Vadim

            And I'm about the second camera!
            It’s easier for me to take a second carcass, compatible with all my optics, than an ultrasound. And cheaper.

            So frustration is less than with one fix. Even than with a set of fixes. In short, this is the most similar option.

    • Lynx

      Yeah .. it makes sense for firms to release something like that for lazy people who want "a mega lens that is awesome for all occasions, like megazum only on a cool DSLR." Then the truth turns out that the picture is not the same, and the weight is large, and dark, and 2/3 of the focus nafig did not fall (or they were useful 1-2 times, and those that were useful would be better shot with a telephoto camera), but the lens has already been sold, a profit has been obtained ...

      • Vadim

        But some people simply need to go through this stage in order to later feel the difference and move on to something more serious with an understanding of goals and objectives.

        And for some, “enlightenment” never comes, and they live their whole lives in happy ignorance, continuing to think that they have the best “mega lens” in the world, which is awesome for all occasions, like megazum only on a cool DSLR ”:)

        • First Substation

          It should be easier, guys. Too much arrogance. I have a Tamron from this family (still without VR, but already with a motor). In your opinion, I am just such a cattle, which frustrates ultrasound. And - you, dear, are wrong. 18-200 (like 18-300, etc.) is the icing on the cake in the whale line 18-55, 18-105 etc. Although you are arrogant towards them, you do not understand the economy and do not understand that wide lines of plastic 18-xxx enable your favorite companies to produce your favorite glasses, and on the other hand, please their owners, or upset them, making them think about 70 -210 or even about fixes.
          Well, even knowing the joy of a sharp picture, I still take 18-250 on a long journey. Because it is convenient, although not always highly artistic. I have never regretted that I gave 6000r for tamron 18-250 without vr. But we are very different photographers.

    • Yuriy75

      I think the Canon Power Shot G15 will fit better instead of the ultrasound, the EGF 28-140 aperture 1.8-2.8. More compact and 1/7 matrix

      • Denis

        The G15 (and indeed the G-series) is a good device, but cannot be compared with the lens from the review because of the small zoom :)

        • Yuriy75

          Lack of zoom is compensated by legs and head. A luminosity and compatibility with an external flash, plus much smaller dimensions and a much higher picture quality can hardly be overestimated.

          • Denis

            Not all objects can be reached

    • Arkady Shapoval

      About bokeh, I advise you to think carefully -

    • Anatoly Snezhan

      I don’t want not sharp optics for nothing!

  • deivis

    I bought this lens a couple of years ago for Nikon d90 with the idea of ​​versatility in mind. Data 18-270 is very versatile, but I can't deal with jitter. at 270mm in the mountains, in the brilliant sun, exposure 500 - blurry. And, of course, 3,5-6,3. The versatility would be not only in the distance, but also in the diaphragm, and here the darkness. Ie I would not buy it now.

    • Denis

      Now compare with the Canon PowerShot SX40, for example.
      It has focal lengths equivalent to 24 - 840 mm, i.e. even on a wide angle, he makes this lens, I am already silent about the telerange. So with such a monstrous zoom, its aperture is F2.7 - F5.8. Its crop is 5.62, for portraits with bokeh on long focal lengths it will do quite well. At focal points comparable to this lens, it will be possible to shoot either with a faster shutter speed, or at lower ISO, the gain is obvious. There is a good image stabilizer. It costs less than this optics, while it is a self-contained device that, in case of anything, will replace a DSLR :)

      • Novel

        There is a difference between "I don't need" and "I don't need". Or is it absolutely necessary to declare war on the zooms and not rest until they are interrupted? :)

        • Denis

          I just made an argument, I did not declare any war.

      • Sergei

        Well, vi with Nikon canons .. you see nothing more .. a long time ago there is a soap dish with a fast lens, with a 1 / 1.63 matrix, with a stab on the matrix and the best sharpness on the market (without chromaticity and other things) .. with equal and all the charms. .

        olympus xz1

        EGF 28-110mm, aperture 1.8-2.5; ISO 800 is quite working, but with a speed and a stab on the matrix, 1600 is unlikely to be needed sometime .. (by the way, automation never puts more than 800)

        bokeh example:

        ISO 800 (the worst result that can be obtained from the camera in the machine)

        iso 100

        mdf (macro) an example of sharpness.

        I am by no means promoting this model of camera, it just seems that people are mesmerized by the word “reflex camera” and don’t see anything else, moreover, from such a narrow spectrum as a reflex camera, people are also fixated on 2 systems.

        • Anatoly Snezhan

          As far back as 2006, I understood without a hitch: for 1000 cu You can have everything at once for a successful
          amateur "photo life", and (or) ... just the carcass of an average cropped SLR for an unsuccessful amateur "photo life". In the second case, you will “climb” and break down for a long time (always!), Not keep up with more or less bright optics, filters, etc.
          Make up your mind, proletarian, comrade, even more so if you are not a master (the difference is in the weight of your wallet)! Determine forever. You need to pay 3000 USD. for a decent amateur camera? And you can throw this money down the drain without prejudice to yourself? Go for it. From only not requiring to pose as a Great Photographer-Artist - the greats at the finish of life again shoot with mechanical cameras from the times of the First and Second World Wars. Photographic truth is at the origin of photography.

          • Anatoly Snezhan

            Yes, today there are more decent "soap dishes" (of the level of pseudo-mirrors) than there are decent photo-mirrors. For 1000 USD you can choose the one that will brighten your life. Including creative. If you make a masterpiece, it will be torn off with a matrix that costs $ 20. And vice versa: look at how much crap in the internet from owners of FF cameras for $ 5000. I would such photographers with their own cameras ... Little buratins and buratins.

      • Yuriy75

        Forgive me, but the Canon PowerShot SX40 gives a less sharp picture to an EGF of 100mm, then the sharpness drops very much due to chromatic aberration, you can’t get a normal picture on a cloudy day.

  • Gene jb

    This lens is made for traveling in hot countries. Therefore it is so dark. They all have the same name travel zoom. When there is no time to rearrange the lens, and on a trip it is easier to drag one lens than a set of 14mm / 50/135/200/300. If you need serious work, then drag a set of one and a half kilogram L-k.

  • R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№

    Thanks to the author for the site.
    Very good reviews of technology. This review pleased as always. Although I do not shoot so much, it was my personal opinion that all the same, lenses of different focal lengths are more important than one universal one. Yes, taking pictures for myself will be resolved immediately lens. But for a good leisurely frame it’s better to detach, attach another lens. As written above for travel, it’s better when it’s better.
    I used Tamron once and the “soapiness” of the pictures killed me. Now I don’t even know whether to replenish the device with such “glass” or not.
    As stated above, universality is not always good!

  • Anonymous 1

    You said: “I used Tamron once…”. You missed the word “this” because this manufacturer has a lot of VERY good optics; some lenses are simply unique in their properties! And this one - yes, very mediocre optically and was created as a compromise option for the traveling amateur who is not interested in the nuances of the drawing, but it is convenient to shoot monkeys in the trees in Thailand. What's wrong with that? To each according to his needs. Why try on someone else's dress and tell the whole world that it is not enough for you? Sew yourself separately ...

  • Vladimir

    Mnd ... ... Poor lens for $ 500. (

    Thanks for the review, Arkady!

  • Eldar

    Tamron AF 70-300mm F4-5.6 macro will there be a review on this lens? Nikonovsky mount

  • Konstantin

    Good time of the day! I have a Nikon D3100 and a kit lens 18-55. In the summer we are going to St. Petersburg. We will shoot both the city itself - buildings, streets, monuments, etc., and in museums. I would also like to photograph the city at night. Please give me some advice: which one to buy 18-105 or 50 / 1,8G lens? The budget, unfortunately, is limited to 10 thousand. (And yet, you don't want to “zoom” with your feet either, and it's not always possible). Thanks in advance.

    • Yuriy75

      For walks around the city 18-55 is enough. For portraits, 50mm 1.8 can be used, although for the photo "... I'm near a tower or a palace ..."

  • Alexander

    Well, if you don’t want to zoom with your feet, then the choice is obvious))) But the fix is ​​fixed, his picture will be better than that of the zoom, you have to sacrifice convenience for the sake of the picture.

  • Alexander

    Buy a fix better, you already have 18-55 and take them both on a trip.

  • Vladimir

    In fact, it is not expensive, for example, it costs less than 10t on Nikon

  • Pastor

    In vain they scold this lens. As for me - excellent glass. Being the owner of Tamron 18-200 I decided that it would be nice to have the same lens, but with a stub. Extra 70 mm does not really give anything, but the stub really helps. On the other hand, the larger size is frustrating, compared to 18-200. The soapiness of both tamrons firstly depends on the photographer (as with any other glass). If it is unskillful to select the shutter speed / aperture / ISO, then there will be no sharpness even at 70-200 2.8L. But most often this glass becomes the second, or even the first lens of the photographer, which means that experience is not enough. In addition, it is important to be able to hold the camera correctly, a stub cannot always save the day. In addition, you need to be able to work with rav files - adding sharpness is never a problem. Well, in general, the sharpness of images at 18-270 is sufficient to print them on a3 (and who prints even a4?). There is no lack of sharpness on the monitor screen without increasing, the contrast is high. In general, for some reason, tamrons in a Jepeg take photos in warmer colors - apparently the autoBB with tamrons does not work the same way as with native glasses. By the way, I have this tamron on Nikon.
    I read many reviews that the Canon 55-250is gives better quality for a lower price. Nobody argues, only there is no wide angle on the canon. I have a 55-250is and it outperforms Tamron in everything except the convenience of the focal ones. I was also surprised by the size of this tamron 18-270. It is even wider than my Nikon 70-300BR, though a little shorter. With the lens hood it looks like you have something really serious :) It's pointless to compare this glass with fixes. But travel-zoom from it is normal. And I took it precisely in order not to drag the same 55-250 plus 18-55 or fixes with me. Well, about the price. In our store, it costs 18000 rubles. The price is not just unjustified - inadequate. Although the native 18-200ВР from Nikon is more expensive than it should be. But taking such glass from hand is quite possible. I took it for 100 euros (5000 rubles) and for this price as a replacement for an unstable tamron 18-200 - the glass is just super. I am sure that now this large lens will settle on some Nikon's carcass for a long time. For a serious and long photo session (in the summer, all kinds of open-air festivals), you can take 400d with 40mm 2.8, 50d with 55-250IS, d80 with 50 1.8 and d5100 with this tamron. There will be all focal points, and a beautiful drawing, and aperture ratio. Before that, in the same set on d80 there were 18-200 (this glass did not have its own focusing motor, so I did not put it on d5100), and on d5100 it was 70-300vr. True, the focusing speed of the 18-270 does not even come close to 70-300vr. But faster than 50 1.4g :) The speed is comparable to the whale 18-55vr from Nikon, and this is given the incomparably large focal range. In general, for a universal lens, the 18-270 is good and it's pointless to argue :) Those who can take only one glass on a trip and those who don't plan to look at 100% crop after a trip, who are not sick with perfectionism and are ready to slightly compromise image quality, for an unbeatable angle - you have to buy! By the way, Tamron has already practically started selling a new superzoom - 16-300 with a stub. So Nikon with his 18-300 again loses to Tamron in terms of coverage of focal lengths. When the price of a used 16-300 drops to an acceptable 7-8 thousand, I will gladly change this 18-270 for a newer model.

    • First Substation

      literally a week was left before the dollar started to rise in price ... :)

  • Sergei

    Gentlemen and amateur photographers, help me make the right choice. I climbed a bunch of reviews, but never found an answer for myself.
    What to choose NIKON AF-S 18-200 mm VRII or TAMRON 18-270mm F / 3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD?

    The goal is a universal travel lens (they are both). For other purposes, there is a fix and a wide-angle, now the choice is just such a station wagon. The question of the price is not worth it, I choose it by the quality / usability ratio. Carcass - Nikon D7200.

    They write about the tamron that the picture quality suffers (especially sharpness), is noisy, it seems to focus a little slower. Although someone writes that Nicorr suffers the same sores.
    What attracts tamron is a larger zoom, less weight, more compact. But if the picture quality is much worse, then what for these additional 70 mm? How do they work with video?

    In general, any thoughts and real experience of comparison are welcome. Thank you all in advance!

    • Dmitriy

      I have a Nikon D7100. I had a Sigma 18-250 (not stolen yet). Sigma is sharper, more interesting (cheaper, again), does not wash the details, look there are comparisons. There is also a new Sigma 18-300 with a built-in motor. If the question of money does not bother you - buy NIKOR 18-300 mm, it will be differently better.

  • Lynx

    Yes, you hesitated to spam in each branch.

  • wharfage

    THANKS to Arcadia for this review and for the site as a whole!
    For half a year that I have been reading it, a good dependence has already developed - if I want to clarify something about the lens or refer to someone else, first of all I look at Radozhiva. Even the material about christening got into the topic! ))
    And I find your materials beyond praise - detailed, organized and understandable for assimilation. Moderately subjective.
    No "show-off" and categorical statements. No false "marketing", for which many thanks to you!

    But suddenly there was a failure - I was interested in the Tamron 16-300 lens. And ... I didn't find it here ... ((
    k.m.k. - this is a very interesting “universal” against the background of competitors, which I sincerely wish you to get and “survey”.
    Especially in comparison with the branded nikkor 18-300, which you unfortunately do not have either. ;)

  • Dan

    Is it worth the wait for the PZD version ozor?

  • Alex isaev

    Oh Gods! How I love this reasoning with swaggering protrusion of the lower lip and tales of ringing sharpness.
    Guys! This is a travel zoom with a gorgeous stub and excellent fr.
    In the summer he fastened it to a carcass and drove to the Crimea.
    I have never regretted that I did not take any other optics with me. Ideal for vacation reporting. And a portrait with a clown on the beach to shoot a child and a ship sailing far away in the sea.
    And the sharpness .... On my XNUMX-inch TV, vacation pictures look just fine.

    And when I go to a commercial shoot ... I take completely different glasses. This is fifty dollars 1.4 and a zoom of 17-50 2.8.

    And even more so, considering that I got this Tamron from an ebay for $ 100 (the American stretched an elastic band on the zoom ring and decided to sell it) - he simply settled in my lens collection forever.

    Yes, you won’t get ringing sharpness from him. But on vacation this glass is simply irreplaceable. Nothing. Absolutely.

  • Rostislav

    Arkady, is it worth it to change my Nikkor 55-200 VR for this instance with extra charge?

    • Pastor

      I am not Arkady, but I would not. If briefly. If in detail, then you need to know why this replacement. There are a number of cases where a replacement makes sense:
      - if you have only one lens - 55-200, then, of course, without a wide angle it is sad and needs to be changed;
      - if you travel often and you need one lens for everything, then tamron will do too;
      - if you are just too lazy to carry several glasses, you need one and inexpensive one, and roughly speaking you do not care about the drop in quality.
      In other cases, the replacement is not entirely successful. If you have 18-55 and 55-200, then each of them will give a better picture in its focal range. Extra 70mm at the long end of the tamron is noticeably soapy, it will be necessary to cover the diaphragm, which means to shoot either with an external flash or in the sun.
      I myself have such a tamron, and I use it only on trips when there is no time to change glasses at all, as well as in reports that do not require high aperture, narrow depth of field and high sharpness, as well as when I go to the report completely light. In general, it is not bad, but 55-200vr will give a sharper image, plus, this is a native lens, which deprives it of possible problems as in the case of a tamron.
      And finally, if you really need a superzoom, take a look at the tamron 16-300vs - it is smaller, has dust and moisture protection, quickly focuses, has a wider and longer zoom position at the same time, and also gives out a slightly sharper picture. But its price is noticeably higher.

  • Rostislav

    Thank you Pastor. I also have a 35mm Nikkor fix. And with 55-200 it's really sad without a wide angle and it's a bit dark. That is why I decided to exchange. I'm waiting, I should come tomorrow ...

  • Then

    And to what value does it make sense to clamp the aperture for maximum sharpness on this tamron?

    • Antip

      Why ask if you don’t have one, and if you have one, then all the more easier to find out for yourself.

  • Antip

    I looked that on aperture 8 there will be a better picture from it.

  • Michael

    I have had this glass since 2009, first on Nikon D50, then on D90. Not without complaints, but I really liked it. Until sometime in 2015, the zoom drive broke. Not hoping for a quality repair, I bought a Tamron 16-300. What can I say ... Yes, both wider and longer. But sharpness is missing as a class. Even at 6MP D50 - porridge in the center.
    Somehow repaired 18-270. Arranged in a service center in Moscow - they agreed to align. Dropped both. I checked after - 18-270 became better than it was, but 16-300 did not. Arranged for a personal meeting, brought back both and D90. Adjusted for a specific device. 18-270 - generally class! And 16-300 - zheppa ... 500 bucks - and throw away ...

    • Arkady Shapoval

      16-300 and I was having trouble focusing, I described it in the review, it's a pity (

  • Jacques

    Mijn lens blokkeert bij het inzoomen, komt daardoor niet verder dan ca. 30mm.
    Wat is daar aan te doen?

    • B. R. P.

      Send it in for repair.

Add a comment

Copyright © Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article

Versión en español de este artículo