Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Posted: 8/12/2014 8:53:41 PM EDT
Looking between the Nikon 70-300 VR and the Tamron 70-300 VC. I've done a lot of Googling but wanted to see if any photographers on Arfcom had experience with either. I'm getting it for some backyard birding, hopefully some wildlife shots, and our dog at the dog park.

From what I can tell:

they are both good from 70-200 but 200-300 the Tamron is sharper.
Tamron's VC is better than Nikon's VR.
Nikon's autofocus speed is faster.
Nikon's build quality is better.

Is the Tamron a super bargain at $100 less than the Nikon or is the Nikon worth $100 more?
Link Posted: 8/12/2014 8:55:01 PM EDT
[#1]
Not a fan of third party lenses.
Link Posted: 8/12/2014 8:58:16 PM EDT
[#2]
My primary lens is a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 so it doesn't bother me as long as the quality is reasonably close.
Link Posted: 8/12/2014 9:21:54 PM EDT
[#3]
I have the Nikon 70-300 VR. It's super sharp although I haven't compared it to anything in the 200-300 range. I would buy it again if I had to do it all over. Great lens.
Link Posted: 8/13/2014 12:11:19 PM EDT
[#4]
I had both lenses and gave the Nikon to relative

Sharpness - not sure if I would agree that the Tamron is sharper from 200-300 . In all fairness I was comparing both to 70-200 ( 200 cropped in to be similar size was actually sharper across the frame than the 300 from either of these lenses ) .  Both these lenses are sharper across the frame when stopped down a wee bit

VC - VC on the Tamron seemed to have better hit rate , but a bit distracting with the cluncks and viewfinder image "floating around" . This is unlike the Nikon VRI and II system which does final stabilization of elements right before shutter release. The Tamron is whirling away constantly

Autofocus speed - no, I would say both focus speeds ( from extreme ends ) was the same. Again, doesn't mean much for the simple reason is neither has as good focus speed as the 2.8 70-200 VRI or VRII  .  You notice when shooting moving people / kids etc  .  

Here is how you test . Depending on body, put AF-C priority on "focus " , and run camera at C high . You will know right away if lens autofocus can keep up with your camera . If you have priority on "release or release + focus" it will bang away at fastest frame rate regardless if in focus

I would rate both focus speeds at equally good but not great. Both faster than screw drive lenses

Build Quality - disagree Nikon build quality is better. Both are plastic body and feel the same

Price

At standard prices depends if you want Nikon brand or not. The vast majority of my lenses are Nikon , but the 70-300 is on of the lenses I feel aftermarked does a bettter job

Tamron often has rebates and when there is rebate its a total no brainer to buy the Tamron. I seem to recall I paid $350 ( $100 rebate ) from BH Photo
Link Posted: 8/13/2014 3:54:42 PM EDT
[#5]
Thanks for the compare.
Link Posted: 8/13/2014 5:08:40 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Looking between the Nikon 70-300 VR and the Tamron 70-300 VC. I've done a lot of Googling but wanted to see if any photographers on Arfcom had experience with either. I'm getting it for some backyard birding, hopefully some wildlife shots, and our dog at the dog park.

From what I can tell:

they are both good from 70-200 but 200-300 the Tamron is sharper.
Tamron's VC is better than Nikon's VR.
Nikon's autofocus speed is faster.
Nikon's build quality is better.

Is the Tamron a super bargain at $100 less than the Nikon or is the Nikon worth $100 more?
View Quote


The pixel peepers in the labs say that the Tamron's IQ is slightly better.  Whether or not you will see the difference in the real world is open for debate.

I have the Nikon 70-300mm VR and have no complaints about it.  However, if I needed to replace it, I would seriously consider the Tamron.
Link Posted: 8/13/2014 7:32:32 PM EDT
[#7]
Went with the Tamron. They seemed too close to call so cost won out. I think I'll like it better than my 55-200VR.
Link Posted: 8/18/2014 10:13:21 PM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


The pixel peepers in the labs say that the Tamron's IQ is slightly better.  Whether or not you will see the difference in the real world is open for debate.

I have the Nikon 70-300mm VR and have no complaints about it.  However, if I needed to replace it, I would seriously consider the Tamron.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Looking between the Nikon 70-300 VR and the Tamron 70-300 VC. I've done a lot of Googling but wanted to see if any photographers on Arfcom had experience with either. I'm getting it for some backyard birding, hopefully some wildlife shots, and our dog at the dog park.

From what I can tell:

they are both good from 70-200 but 200-300 the Tamron is sharper.
Tamron's VC is better than Nikon's VR.
Nikon's autofocus speed is faster.
Nikon's build quality is better.

Is the Tamron a super bargain at $100 less than the Nikon or is the Nikon worth $100 more?


The pixel peepers in the labs say that the Tamron's IQ is slightly better.  Whether or not you will see the difference in the real world is open for debate.

I have the Nikon 70-300mm VR and have no complaints about it.  However, if I needed to replace it, I would seriously consider the Tamron.


How does the 70-300 compare to the 70-200 F2.8?  I've rented the 70-200 before and was blown away by its performance, but I have no experience with the 70-300.
Link Posted: 8/19/2014 12:42:10 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
How does the 70-300 compare to the 70-200 F2.8?  I've rented the 70-200 before and was blown away by its performance, but I have no experience with the 70-300.
View Quote

I have both lenses.  They are from two different worlds.  The pro lens with the f/2.8 gives you the results you would expect from a $2500 lens of that size and weight.  The small and light $600 70-300mm VR is a great consumer lens, but it is still a consumer lens.  The 70-300mm is my "family vacation" telephoto lens.  All that said, both lenses at 200mm and at f/8 and you would probably not see the difference in the output.
Link Posted: 8/19/2014 12:20:46 PM EDT
[#10]
Thanks!  I used the 70-200 lens on my D7000 to shoot some photos in Valdez, AK earlier this summer.  I was very impressed with the performance of that lens.  


I generally shoot with a 55-200 kit lens.  If the light is great (meaning I can shoot around F8ish and use low ISO numbers) my 55-200 kit lens produces pretty good results.  But as soon as it gets overcast and I try to shoot at 200mm, that lens really begins to show its weakness…… especially if I'm trying to capture wildlife (which seems to be mostly what I do now).  


Renting the 70-200 was an eye opening experience.  I just sold my Tokina 11-16 wide angle to help my "70-200 fund" move along.  I think it will be a year before I have enough cash scraped together, but I will own that lens one day.
Link Posted: 8/19/2014 3:38:23 PM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Thanks!  I used the 70-200 lens on my D7000 to shoot some photos in Valdez, AK earlier this summer.  I was very impressed with the performance of that lens.  

I generally shoot with a 55-200 kit lens.  If the light is great (meaning I can shoot around F8ish and use low ISO numbers) my 55-200 kit lens produces pretty good results.  But as soon as it gets overcast and I try to shoot at 200mm, that lens really begins to show its weakness…… especially if I'm trying to capture wildlife (which seems to be mostly what I do now).  

Renting the 70-200 was an eye opening experience.  I just sold my Tokina 11-16 wide angle to help my "70-200 fund" move along.  I think it will be a year before I have enough cash scraped together, but I will own that lens one day.
View Quote

Take a look at your needs and usage.  If you don't need the f/2.8 aperture, the new 70-200mm f/4 is a fabulous lens at a noticeable cut in size and weight and price.
Link Posted: 8/19/2014 9:58:10 PM EDT
[#12]
Honestly, the most versatile DX Nikon lens is the 18-200mm VR II.  Excellent lens for general use.  They are going for about $600 now and that is a steal.
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top