I was wondering what would be the better lens between the two for my Nikon D40? I'm leaning towards the 18-270. Anyone have any experience with these lenses?

I currently have the Tamron non VC autofocus 18-200mm and I'm not really satisfied wit the results. The sharpness seems to be off. But having the capability to reach out is a plus (so I use it more than the kit lens that the camera came with). I thought I could live with it because of the price that i got it for. But I guess the saying you get what you pay for is true in this situation. As soon as I return home from my trip I will exchange the 18-200 to either one in the title above.

I'm a newbie to DSLR and I just like to take a lot of pictures to show off to my wife or to reminisce. So which one is a better lens to make a scrap book with?


v/r


Rick

None of the "super zoom" type lenses are going to be great as compared to higher quality lenses with a less ambitious focal range from wide to long (i.e., using more than one lens to cover the same range).

Here are a couple of reviews for the Tamron 18-270mm VC you may want to look at. They're both on Canon versus Nikon bodies.

This review was using the lens on a Canon EOS-50D (15MP model). Keep in mind that the higher resolution sensor should place more demands on the lens quality needed for best results compared to using one on your D40.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/41...0_3563vc_canon

Here's a review showing it on a lower resolution Canon EOS-20D (8MP):

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1217/cat/23

As for the 28-300mm, it depends on what you want to shoot. You may find that 28mm is a bit long on the wide end to fit what you need into the frame (as you can only back up so far in many conditions).

Rambilt-

You might want to take a look at the Pentax DSLR Lens Folder. There are some good photo examples there of the Pentax 18-250mm lens which is built by Tamron.

I have the Pentax 18-250 mm lens on order and will post some examples when I return on 15 August from this next teaching contract. The Tamron 18-270mm lens has VC which would be an advantage on your Nikon D-40. The pentax 18-250mm lens does not have VC, but Pentax DSLR cameras has their brand of IS, which tey call SR (shake reduction) built into the camera body.

Sarah Joyce

JimC and mtclimber;

Thank you for the replies. Will any of these lenses (18-270 and 28-300) be sharper than the 18-200 that I already have? I figured since the two lenses with VC are twice as much they would be a lot better, am I right in this assumptiom? Thanks.



v/r

Rick

The Tamron 18-250mm was a big improvement over the original Tamron 18-200mm. From what I can see from reviews, so is the 18-270mm (and the VC should help with any blur from camera shake you've been getting when shutter speeds are on the slow side), although it's going to be a bit softer at it's longer zoom settings. Stopping down the aperture can help (for example, use f/8 versus f/5.6 or f/6.3 as you zoom in towards the longer end)

My understanding is that the Tamron 18-250mm is superior to both the Tamron 18-200mm & and Tamron 18-270mm.

BTW, the Pentax 18-250mm is the same optic as the Tamron 18-250mm. Pentax obviously knew it was better than most, when they teamed up with Tamron to use the Tamron optics!!

JimC, thanks, I have read a bunch of pro reviews and consumer reviews about the 18-270 with VC. They seem to be more postive than negative from what I can find. Being new to DSLR I really want to get myself a better lens that I can be happy with ocassional zoom and lot of candid portrait like picture of people and animals. I think the auto focus and the Vibration compensation (VC) ofthe 18-270 will suit my needs fine. Again thank you.



v/r

Rick

Hi there, thanks for the reply. I think I 'll stick with the auto focus and the VR capable lens because I really don't know what I'm doing yet with the DSLR.



v/r

Rick

Rick-

The bottom line is this:

(1) How much zoom do you really desire?

(2) How much "trade off" in terms of image quality are you willing tolerate to get more zoom?

(3) How much "trade off", in terms of perceived noise in your photos are you willing to tolerate to use these long zoom lenses, that need an increased ISO setting as the lens moves to its max zoom position and the usable aperture gets smaller and smaller and the usable shutter speed also is progressively slowed?

At least for me, the Nikon 18-200mm lens represents a very workable compromise of those factors, noted in (3) above. However, that is a decision that only you can make Rick.

Sarah Joyce

Hi there Sarah, you have a good point. I'll check some reviews and opinions about the Nikon 18-200 VR. I thought Nikon lenses are very pricey?


v/r

rick