Are Tamron lenses good?

[seenew]

I'm about to buy a Canon EOS 350D on ebay for $1099.99 that comes with

-Canon Efs 18-55mm
-Tamron 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical Autofocus Wide Angle
-Tamron 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 LD MACRO
-(offbrand) Pro 0.42X Wide-Angle lens
-3 UV Filters
-3 Lens Pouches
-3 Lens Hoods
-Auto Digital Flash
-2 Gigabyte Compact Flash Card
-USB Memory Card Reader
-shock-proof hard case
-deluxe camera bag
-55" tripod
-table tripod
-cleaning kit

I'm new to DSLRs and know nothing about Tamron, is it worth it? I found another kit for the same price, but only two Cannon lenses instead of a Cannon and 2 Tamrons...

 

[Poeben]

I won't comment on the quality of the lenses, but that price seems quite high. The two Tamron lenses you list sell as a kit for $200 on B&H. The canon 18-55 is the kit lens that comes with the camera. My advice, run away from this "deal."

 

[ksz]

This is a good question, one that I've often wondered myself -- among the three principal third-party lens makers (Sigma, Tokina, Tamron), which is considered the best?

Probably MR members Jared Kipe and Chip NoVaMac can provide a good answer, but in my experience the answer depends entirely upon the particular lens. (I wouldn't ask Clix Pix because she shops only in the super ultra premium category. )

Many of the new models introduced by all three companies have been well received and highly rated. Since I am not familiar with the 2 Tamrons you listed, I can only refer you to other sites:

1. Fred Miranda has end-user reviews of both the 28-80 f/3.5-5.6 and the 75-300 f/4.0-5.6.

2. Photozone has a large set of lens reviews written in a way that everyone can understand. The author of this website also uses a Canon 350D.

3. In general, dpreview's forums are chock full of such information.

 

[bartelby]

I have a Tamron 24mm and an 80 - 210mm for a 35mm SLR. I've used them for about 20 years. They're great. I'm not sure about the quality of their newer lenses though.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Probably MR members Jared Kipe and Chip NoVaMac can provide a good answer, but in my experience the answer depends entirely upon the particular lens. (I wouldn't ask Clix Pix because she shops only in the super ultra premium category. ).

I prefer Tamron over others, since they offer more limited choices verse others, in particular Sigma. The exception is the Tokina 12-24 vs, the Tamron 11-18. Both are stellar performers in my tests.

The Tamron wins out on speed and zoom ratio. The Tokina wins on price vs. performance.

 

[form]

Many Tamron lenses are very competitive in quality, and are also compact and lightweight. Image quality is generally pretty high, and I prefer them over Sigma.

 

[ipacmm]

I only buy Canon lenses but I have heard very good reviews about Tamron lenses, the only one I have heard mixed reviews was the 18-200...

 

[Le Big Mac]

Many Tamron lenses are very competitive in quality, and are also compact and lightweight. Image quality is generally pretty high, and I prefer them over Sigma.

But bear in mind by "competitive in quality" I assume poster means "with other lower priced lenses". Tamron and the others are aimed at teh consumer market that does not want/have the ability to buy the pro-end lenses. Nothing wrong with that--not everyone can afford $1000 for a lens. But don't expect to get that level of quality (which probably is irrelevant to 99% of photographers anyway).

 

[jared_kipe]

I prefer Tamron over others, since they offer more limited choices verse others, in particular Sigma. The exception is the Tokina 12-24 vs, the Tamron 11-18. Both are stellar performers in my tests.

The Tamron wins out on speed and zoom ratio. The Tokina wins on price vs. performance.

I prefer Sigma lenses, as they have HSM, and OS technologies. And I like the look and feel of their lenses.

 

[jared_kipe]

The lenses in question are all substandard. Look for a body only, or at the very least a body without so many bad lenses. Then look to add something like the Sigma 18-125mm.

 

[ChrisA]

If you want to compare the quality of tamron to canon lenses you have to be more specific. Canon in recent years has come out of some low-cost consummer grade lenses non-USM and plastic bodies and so on. The 350D's Kit lens the 18-55 is an example. Sigma, Tramron do make some good,high quality lenses so you can say that "Some 3rd party lenses are better then some Canon lenses". In other words there is overlap.

One good rule of thumb is if you see a lens that opens up to only f/5.6 it was designed with price as an importent design criteria. Not many f/5.6 lenss are top quality. But then "not top quality" does not mean "junk".

But then you have to look at the inteneded use and your budget. Many people can't justify spending $$$ on something that is really just a toy or an entertaining hobby and so these $160 long range zoom might be OK I bought a cheap Vivitar zoom when I was in the 9th grade because there was no way I could afford a "real Nikon" lens. I was able to do good work with it too.

 

[Josh]

I've got a tamron on my 35mm rebel. It is a very nice lens.

The only other lenses I own are Nikon lenses, so I cannot offer a canon comparison.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

But bear in mind by "competitive in quality" I assume poster means "with other lower priced lenses". Tamron and the others are aimed at teh consumer market that does not want/have the ability to buy the pro-end lenses. Nothing wrong with that--not everyone can afford $1000 for a lens. But don't expect to get that level of quality (which probably is irrelevant to 99% of photographers anyway).

Actually I think they were thinking in terms of optical quality. Take the 70-300 from Tamron, it compares quite nicely with the likes of the Nikon 70-300ED and the Canon 75-300's. And the 11-18 is on par optically and distortion with the likes of the Nikon 12-24 and the Canon 10-22. And many feel that for the money the 28-75/2.8 and the 17-50/2.8 are close enough to the Canon and Nikon offerings, they would rather save the money.

 

[jared_kipe]

Actually I think they were thinking in terms of optical quality. Take the 70-300 from Tamron, it compares quite nicely with the likes of the Nikon 70-300ED and the Canon 75-300's. And the 11-18 is on par optically and distortion with the likes of the Nikon 12-24 and the Canon 10-22. And many feel that for the money the 28-75/2.8 and the 17-50/2.8 are close enough to the Canon and Nikon offerings, they would rather save the money.

Whoa, I can't comment on the other ones, but the 11-88mm Tamron is IMHO the worst of the wide angle lenses. Here is why.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1118_4556/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1020_456/index.htm

The distortion is worse, the Sharpness is WAY WORSE, and the Chromatic aberration is much worse.

When I went to buy a wide angle I eliminated that one sooo fast..

 

[form]

The Tamron AF28-200mm f/3.8-5.6 XR Di Aspherical [IF] Macro might not be a bad choice for a starter. From what I've read, the distortions and other quality issues are much better than the somewhat wider 18-200mm lens they make, and also better than the 28-300mm. It should provide you with an adequate range.

 

[l'homme]

Don't attempt to use another lenses that aren't Canon

Don't attempt to use another lenses that aren't Canon, they'll void the camera's warranty.
Also Tamron ain't as good as the best manufacturer of lenses.
What do you prefer? Quantity or the best quality in camera lens?
Cheers.

 

[Mike Teezie]

I really like my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 lens. I shoot weddings and portraits with it, and it performs well.

So far, it's kept me happy enough that I haven't bought Canon's 24-70 f/2.8L.

On the telephoto end, nothing compared to the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS.

For what it's worth, I wouldn't consider from that package you listed above.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Whoa, I can't comment on the other ones, but the 11-88mm Tamron is IMHO the worst of the wide angle lenses. Here is why.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1118_4556/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1020_456/index.htm

The distortion is worse, the Sharpness is WAY WORSE, and the Chromatic aberration is much worse.

When I went to buy a wide angle I eliminated that one sooo fast..

Could be based on sample differences. For I have seen reports from other tests and actual users that feel otherwise.

I am not trying to be a Tamron fanboi. Many of the 3rd party lens makers make good lenses. My issue with Sigma in one of my posts here is based on their reverse engineering the Canon mount, and the rechipping issue because of it.

With any lens purchase, one needs to actually shoot with it and see if they are happy with the results for the money paid.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Don't attempt to use another lenses that aren't Canon, they'll void the camera's warranty.
Also Tamron ain't as good as the best manufacturer of lenses.
What do you prefer? Quantity or the best quality in camera lens?
Cheers.

OK, I know that some will say that I "feeding the troll"; since this is your first post on MR - but I will say a few words.

I am too lazy at this point to get out my Canon manuals to check the exact wording of what Canon says about using non-Canon lenses. But I doubt it is as dire as you say.

On your second point, did you know that camera manufacturers routinely use 3rd party manufacturers to make the more affordable lenses? Sometimes it is based on the 3rd party design, in others it is the camera manufacturers design.

On the issue of quality. That is in the eye of the user. Not everyone has deep pockets to be able to buy the camera manufacturers lenses. And in maybe 80% of the cases, they see no real difference in the quality between lenses. In some cases the tests of lenses shows that it is a draw, or the 3rd party companies can beat the camera companies out.

Cheers to you too. Look forward to your contributing in other threads here on MR.

 

[form]

I really like my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 lens. I shoot weddings and portraits with it, and it performs well.

So far, it's kept me happy enough that I haven't bought Canon's 24-70 f/2.8L.

On the telephoto end, nothing compared to the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS.

For what it's worth, I wouldn't consider from that package you listed above.

But, the Tamron 28-75mm, though faster and higher quality overall, is also more expensive and has far less zoom range than the 28-200 or other similar lenses.

 

[Abstract]

But bear in mind by "competitive in quality" I assume poster means "with other lower priced lenses". Tamron and the others are aimed at teh consumer market that does not want/have the ability to buy the pro-end lenses.

But some of the Sigma/Tamron/Tokina lenses are just as good as the Nikon/Canon/Olympus/etc lenses. They cost less, but this doesn't mean the quality doesn't match. I also have the Tokina 12-24 mm, and from all the research I did on this lens, all I found was that the Tokina was extremely well built and was just as good optically as the Nikon 12-24 mm. When I say that the optical quality was the same, I mean that they both had their own individual problem, but neither of them were highly unusable.

Actually, the Tokina was supposed to be sharper and half the price where I live. Need I say more?

I'm not saying that I'm a Tokina fanboy, nor am I a Sigma or Tamron fan, but I will buy whatever lens gives me the great performance for a good price (it doesn't even have to be the best/cheapest price), and if it happens to be a Tokina or Sigma, I go with it. I have no loyalty to any of the companies. I buy what's best for me. My next lens is probably going to be a Sigma 105 mm, or a Nikon 18-200 mm (or both, if I want to eat nothing but plain rice for the next year ).

 

[jared_kipe]

Don't attempt to use another lenses that aren't Canon, they'll void the camera's warranty.
Also Tamron ain't as good as the best manufacturer of lenses.
What do you prefer? Quantity or the best quality in camera lens?
Cheers.

Gosh, I must be up **** creek then since I only have lenses on my 30D that are not OEM Canon lenses. Oh wait, I paid only $1300 in Sigma lenses that would have cost $3000 had I gotten comparable lenses from Canon. I guess when my 30D craps out because of my Sigma EX pro lenses I can just buy a brand new one with the difference in price.

EDIT: Oh and I love how the 10D's er99 problem was really caused by dirty lens contacts, but Canon's official response to it is that they used 3rd party lenses and it broke the camera. LOL

 

[CanadaRAM]

Back to the original post:
Why in heaven's name are you even considering ordering cameras from an unknown company on eBay?

You have everything going against you -- no clear identity of the seller, shipping costs - sometimes grossly inflated, limited - bordering on no - protection from PayPal or eBay regarding the quality of and proper identification of the goods.

As a general oversimplification and without reference to the particular eBay seller -- discounted Kits offered mail-order are high probablility of including off-brand, substandard, reconditioned used or "B" grade products, gray market (non-USA) source goods with little or no warranty, bait and switch sales tactics, inflated shipping and insurance, non-Canon authorized dealers, agressive upselling of overpriced accessories, and charges for components (like batteries, lens covers, chargers, software and manuals) that are normally included.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

As a general oversimplification and without reference to the particular eBay seller -- discounted Kits offered mail-order are high probablility of including off-brand, substandard, reconditioned used or "B" grade products, gray market (non-USA) source goods with little or no warranty, bait and switch sales tactics, inflated shipping and insurance, non-Canon authorized dealers, agressive upselling of overpriced accessories, and charges for components (like batteries, lens covers, chargers, software and manuals) that are normally included.

The biggest concern of this list is the non-authorized dealer status. This eliminates any rebates and warranty repair. With grey market items, Canon will do warranty repairs, Nikon will not do any repairs - unless you can prove that you bought the item while out of country.

 

[drake]

I wouldn't buy a Canon lens in this country (Canada) since they lost my $1000 "L" lens when sent for repair and very actively hid that fact from me for over a month. It was a bit of a shock to be given this treatment from what I considered one of the best companies out there.

So, IMO a trusted brand name isn't a guarantee of anything.