Beginner lens?… no, sorry, you can be a pro… but you don’t need a pair of 2.8 lenses when you go on a trekking, camping/ beach with your family. An a6000 serie and a lens like this is all you need , specially if you are on summer with more than enough light.
This is such a fun lens to shoot with on Fuji. For stills, day and night, it does the job. Before this, I used Fuji's excellent 70-300mm and I recommend that one for those who need a bit more sharpness, a touch better stabilization and brighter aperture (with aperture ring). I've also used Fuji's 16-80mm F4, a great lens. But all in all, the flexibility of the Tamron won me over. The creative choices with it are abundant. All zooms have compromises, but the Tamron is surprisingly good for this incredible range. I figured I might as well just have a single do-it-all zoom and stick to primes for everything else.
You said it perfectly..."have a single do-it-all zoom and stick to primes for everything else". I think I'm gonna downgrade my lenses and follow this philosophy.
I have this lens for more than a year. Generally I am super happy with the lens, it's my working horse on my sony a6400. One major flow I noticed from the day one: any filter I put on this lens makes the images blurry. No matter what type of filter (ND, polarized, UV, ...) and it's quality (I don't buy cheap filters) the blurriness is always there. The same filters work great on any other lenses I have. Do you have the same issue with this lens? Maybe I got a lemon so I am not sure if I need to contact Tamron about this issue.
I took this lens to Alaska on my a6600. It's a great value for the zoom range, but it can't hold focus while you zoom. You have to refocus after changing the focal length. As long as you don't change the focal length it'll keep focus, so it's not ideal for moving wildlife. Also, not good for humid areas. I was on a cruise tour in an Alaska bay and this thing fogged up like crazy. I wish that I had my higher quality lenses on that trip, but I was packing light.
Mate this lens with the Sony a6700 and you have an incredible combo. Whether I am chasing bees or getting a shot of the full moon, this lens proves to be sharp, meaning I can't tell the difference between a Sony G lens and the Tamron, even when pixel peeping. It has far fewer features than the Sony lens and cost less as a result. The vibration control combined with the a6700 IBIS makes shooting a breeze, almost. But it helps a lot.
I use this on my Fuji cameras. It works well both ends, I love just taking this lens out for the day. Just a spare battery and no backpack. Its sooo versatile
Any idea why this lens doesn't work for me? I have the Fujifilm XT 200 and the pictures at 300mm are simply unsharp (I can notice it without even zooming in the picture on the laptop screen). I have the 50-230 lens and wanted to upgrade to 300mm to photograph airplanes, I tried the 300mm a couple of times and it never worked. Also the focus was very slow at high zoom. (compared to 250mm). Could it be that my camera is "too weak" for this lens, or could it be that the lens is faulty? Or perhaps I'm doing something wrong? Thanks!
Hello! What is the best or not expensive Vnd filter for tamron 18-300mm sony for video. I bought a k&f concept nano-d but when I zoom out to 200-300 mm the video is very noisy. Thank you for your response.
Hello Stefan excellent review, thanks. I have a big question I am doing an European Trip, I just bought the ZV-E10, need to choose the right lens for the trips, i like landscaping, castles,people, daytime and nightime etc. Between Tamron 11-20, Sony 11, Sigma 16, Sigma 18-50, Tamron 17-70 and Tamron 18-300 or any other suggestion on Telephoto lenses. Which 3 would you choose? Thanks a lot.
Ok for stills, if you are a videographer the stabilization might be a problem. I went for the XF70-300mm in the end as the do called stabilisation in this lens is not great by all accounts.
Like its DSLR predecessors, this one looks like a great Travel Lens too! How's Focus breathing on this one? My Tamron 18-400 has quite a good amount of it when zooming all the way in to 400mm and focusing at nearer objects. At the closest focusing distance, there's so much shift that at 400mm, it starts giving results that I would expect at ~150mm focal length. It works well for great distances though, so I've no complaints as that's where that 400mm is really needed, but it leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to getting close-ups of shy subjects at close distance, like butterflies or small birds. At 300mm, I would expect less focus breathing in this one, But I would be interested in knowing what you observed..
My main complaint with this lens is the zoom work. It is uneven, it is harder to walk in places. This causes problems during smooth zooming in and out during filming. Connected follow focus jumps on the gears in places of greater resistance.
I got this lens due to the excellent reviews. Out of the box, it is a b*^ch to zoom. Over a short period of time and some messaging, the zooming has smoothed out. Not perfect, but not as bad as before. I have to give credit where it is due, it works in tandem with the a6700 like they are two brothers. The focusing on the bees on a shrug with a million blossoms worked great. Many pictures came out perfect, but he bees made it hard. They always had their butt end out and until the head appeared, I didn't get a lock on. I guess the head is necessary where the butt is just another thing on the shrub. Focus is also very quick. Overall, it is a great lens that needs breaking in.
@@StefanMalloch good to hear! I guess it's obvious with the 55-210 being so cheap, but I was curious given that the Tamron has such a huge zoom range and might have needed to compromise. Thanks!
A couple of questions: - How can you be sure you're ordering a Sony E version and not Fujifilm, or vice versa? Unless I've missed something, it doesn't look like there are any obvious marking or visual differences, with the only indicator being the "for Sony E" on the box - Can anyone speak about its sharpness compared to the Sony E 55-210mm? It's a fairly cheap lens so surely the Tamron would be sharper, just wondering because of its massive zoom range
@@StefanMalloch thanks, I do know that but what I mean is, there's no way to be sure that it hasn't been incorrectly labeled as "for Sony E" on Amazon for example. The only reason I say that is because I've seen a few lenses on Amazon that have been wrongly labelled in the title, but from the pictures I could see that it was a different mount. But I can't see any way to distinguish the mounts for the Tamron lens, unless they also give you a clear picture of the mount itself. Edit: I see that the B&H link does include a picture of the mount which is good. But most of the time, there won't be one
Yes, I've had both and was surprised how good the 55-210 was. I got very few good results with the Tamron, was extremely disappointed, kept it for a couple of months then sold it.
@@cvgaming2020 It was lack of sharpness and pictures were also lacking in contrast. I do believe though that copies can vary and I may have been unlucky with mine. I do have a Sony 70 350mm which is wonderful so that was my comparison.
I'm trying to decide between this lens and the Sony PZ 18-105. The Sony seems to be better build quality and sharper optics- but I really want the extra zoom capability for wildlife and landscape photography. What do you guys think?
I’ve had the Sony 18-105 PZ for a few years and find it a bit slow to focus, plus for travel I would like more reach. So that’s why I’m considering the Tamron for travel. The 18-105 might be better for video with the power zoom if that’s what you’re planning to use it for.
What do you think of this all in one zoom?
I love it on my new a6700. Great travel lens
Beginner lens?… no, sorry, you can be a pro… but you don’t need a pair of 2.8 lenses when you go on a trekking, camping/ beach with your family. An a6000 serie and a lens like this is all you need , specially if you are on summer with more than enough light.
This is such a fun lens to shoot with on Fuji. For stills, day and night, it does the job. Before this, I used Fuji's excellent 70-300mm and I recommend that one for those who need a bit more sharpness, a touch better stabilization and brighter aperture (with aperture ring). I've also used Fuji's 16-80mm F4, a great lens. But all in all, the flexibility of the Tamron won me over. The creative choices with it are abundant. All zooms have compromises, but the Tamron is surprisingly good for this incredible range. I figured I might as well just have a single do-it-all zoom and stick to primes for everything else.
You said it perfectly..."have a single do-it-all zoom and stick to primes for everything else". I think I'm gonna downgrade my lenses and follow this philosophy.
I have this lens for more than a year. Generally I am super happy with the lens, it's my working horse on my sony a6400.
One major flow I noticed from the day one: any filter I put on this lens makes the images blurry. No matter what type of filter (ND, polarized, UV, ...) and it's quality (I don't buy cheap filters) the blurriness is always there. The same filters work great on any other lenses I have.
Do you have the same issue with this lens? Maybe I got a lemon so I am not sure if I need to contact Tamron about this issue.
Please do review about nd filter of tamron lens 18-300mm sony apsc.
I took this lens to Alaska on my a6600. It's a great value for the zoom range, but it can't hold focus while you zoom. You have to refocus after changing the focal length. As long as you don't change the focal length it'll keep focus, so it's not ideal for moving wildlife. Also, not good for humid areas. I was on a cruise tour in an Alaska bay and this thing fogged up like crazy. I wish that I had my higher quality lenses on that trip, but I was packing light.
Did you use the continuous auto focus mode.? That might be the reason why it cant keep up with the focus while zooming.
Mate this lens with the Sony a6700 and you have an incredible combo. Whether I am chasing bees or getting a shot of the full moon, this lens proves to be sharp, meaning I can't tell the difference between a Sony G lens and the Tamron, even when pixel peeping. It has far fewer features than the Sony lens and cost less as a result. The vibration control combined with the a6700 IBIS makes shooting a breeze, almost. But it helps a lot.
I use this on my Fuji cameras. It works well both ends, I love just taking this lens out for the day. Just a spare battery and no backpack. Its sooo versatile
Great choice!
Any idea why this lens doesn't work for me? I have the Fujifilm XT 200 and the pictures at 300mm are simply unsharp (I can notice it without even zooming in the picture on the laptop screen). I have the 50-230 lens and wanted to upgrade to 300mm to photograph airplanes, I tried the 300mm a couple of times and it never worked. Also the focus was very slow at high zoom. (compared to 250mm). Could it be that my camera is "too weak" for this lens, or could it be that the lens is faulty? Or perhaps I'm doing something wrong? Thanks!
Hello! What is the best or not expensive Vnd filter for tamron 18-300mm sony for video. I bought a k&f concept nano-d but when I zoom out to 200-300 mm the video is very noisy. Thank you for your response.
It's an awsum lens
Is it me o has a lot of chromatic aberration at 4:43 ?
Good one bro
I’m sceptical regarding the sharpness, I compared it to the sigma 18-50 on my Sony and the sharpness is not good at all at 18mm…
Hello Stefan excellent review, thanks. I have a big question I am doing an European Trip, I just bought the ZV-E10, need to choose the right lens for the trips, i like landscaping, castles,people, daytime and nightime etc. Between Tamron 11-20, Sony 11, Sigma 16, Sigma 18-50, Tamron 17-70 and Tamron 18-300 or any other suggestion on Telephoto lenses. Which 3 would you choose? Thanks a lot.
Ok for stills, if you are a videographer the stabilization might be a problem. I went for the XF70-300mm in the end as the do called stabilisation in this lens is not great by all accounts.
Does anyone know if the Canon 70D has built in Image Stablization?
Like its DSLR predecessors, this one looks like a great Travel Lens too!
How's Focus breathing on this one? My Tamron 18-400 has quite a good amount of it when zooming all the way in to 400mm and focusing at nearer objects. At the closest focusing distance, there's so much shift that at 400mm, it starts giving results that I would expect at ~150mm focal length. It works well for great distances though, so I've no complaints as that's where that 400mm is really needed, but it leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to getting close-ups of shy subjects at close distance, like butterflies or small birds. At 300mm, I would expect less focus breathing in this one, But I would be interested in knowing what you observed..
question, how do you switch from autofocus to manual focus without the bottom on the lens?
My main complaint with this lens is the zoom work. It is uneven, it is harder to walk in places.
This causes problems during smooth zooming in and out during filming. Connected follow focus jumps on the gears in places of greater resistance.
I got this lens due to the excellent reviews. Out of the box, it is a b*^ch to zoom. Over a short period of time and some messaging, the zooming has smoothed out. Not perfect, but not as bad as before. I have to give credit where it is due, it works in tandem with the a6700 like they are two brothers. The focusing on the bees on a shrug with a million blossoms worked great. Many pictures came out perfect, but he bees made it hard. They always had their butt end out and until the head appeared, I didn't get a lock on. I guess the head is necessary where the butt is just another thing on the shrub. Focus is also very quick. Overall, it is a great lens that needs breaking in.
with which bodies does it go better, fuji or sony?
Awesome lens, using it daily... bit large but perfect for my use. Love it!
I love this lens. For day light is the best.
Anyone have experience with this and the Sony E 55-210? How do they compare (specifially AF speed/accuracy and sharpness)?
The Tamron is miles ahead. No comparison.
@@StefanMalloch good to hear! I guess it's obvious with the 55-210 being so cheap, but I was curious given that the Tamron has such a huge zoom range and might have needed to compromise. Thanks!
just ordered one of these. can't wait to try it.
Great review!
A couple of questions:
- How can you be sure you're ordering a Sony E version and not Fujifilm, or vice versa? Unless I've missed something, it doesn't look like there are any obvious marking or visual differences, with the only indicator being the "for Sony E" on the box
- Can anyone speak about its sharpness compared to the Sony E 55-210mm? It's a fairly cheap lens so surely the Tamron would be sharper, just wondering because of its massive zoom range
FE is Sony. X is Fuji
@@StefanMalloch thanks, I do know that but what I mean is, there's no way to be sure that it hasn't been incorrectly labeled as "for Sony E" on Amazon for example. The only reason I say that is because I've seen a few lenses on Amazon that have been wrongly labelled in the title, but from the pictures I could see that it was a different mount. But I can't see any way to distinguish the mounts for the Tamron lens, unless they also give you a clear picture of the mount itself.
Edit: I see that the B&H link does include a picture of the mount which is good. But most of the time, there won't be one
Yes, I've had both and was surprised how good the 55-210 was. I got very few good results with the Tamron, was extremely disappointed, kept it for a couple of months then sold it.
@@dongee1664 very interesting. What stopped you from getting shots with the Tamron? Was it autofocus issues or just lack of sharpness?
@@cvgaming2020 It was lack of sharpness and pictures were also lacking in contrast. I do believe though that copies can vary and I may have been unlucky with mine. I do have a Sony 70 350mm which is wonderful so that was my comparison.
does it have optical steady shot?
Sorry, but did you watch the video bro?
excellent Review. Thank You Stef
I'm trying to decide between this lens and the Sony PZ 18-105. The Sony seems to be better build quality and sharper optics- but I really want the extra zoom capability for wildlife and landscape photography. What do you guys think?
I’ve had the Sony 18-105 PZ for a few years and find it a bit slow to focus, plus for travel I would like more reach. So that’s why I’m considering the Tamron for travel. The 18-105 might be better for video with the power zoom if that’s what you’re planning to use it for.
1st like 1st view 1st comment i want a camera fir my youtube videos
We need a Z-mount version, have you heard anything about this?