A&P Tamron AF 18-270/3.5-6.3 VC - How is this compared to the Nikkor 18-200mm

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by FusionZ06, Dec 31, 2008.

  1. FusionZ06

    FusionZ06 /\__/\__/\__0>

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    86,918
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunshine State
  2. FusionZ06

    FusionZ06 /\__/\__/\__0>

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    86,918
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sunshine State
  3. 1992 240SX

    1992 240SX New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,601
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Long Beach, CA
    With those types of lenses it's always a big compromise. Personally I wouldn't get either but I have heard good things about it.
     
  4. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will never trust another superzoom from Tamron. We used to have Tamron 18-200 & 28-300 where I worked and they were always incredibly soft and eventually died from use (zoom ring froze up on every single one). Unfortunately, our business required us to have such a superzoom because of the nature of our business so we basically had to keep buying new ones. The Sigma versions were always better in both departments and I never got to suggest the Nikon before I left.
     
  5. OneTwo

    OneTwo me>you OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    30,122
    Likes Received:
    92
    the 18-270 has been tested to have better IQ then the nikon 18-200, the sigma 18-200, the tamron 18-250, and the canon 18-200.

    only thing its lacking in was it places about 2nd-3rd in AF speed.
     

Share This Page