Tamron 70-300mm F4.5-6.3 RXD (A047) Definitive Review | 4K
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 11. 2020
- Build and Handling 01:28 | Stabilization Observations 07:18 | Autofocus Performance 10:37 | Image Quality 13:00 | Summation 26:31 Photographer Dustin Abbott shares a thorough review of the bargain Tamron 70-300mm F4.5-6.3 RXD telephoto lens for Sony FE. | Read the Text Review: bit.ly/A047Review | Visit the Image Gallery: bit.ly/A047Images | Purchase the Tamron 70-300mm F4.5-6.3 RXD @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/3mKVfJl | Amazon amzn.to/3pnSAHI | Amazon Canada amzn.to/2K3PKY9 | Camera Canada shrsl.com/2mazp | Amazon UK amzn.to/2UtFo5S | Amazon Germany amzn.to/3nCgTAf | Ebay bit.ly/A047DLA
Purchase a Sony a7C @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/323jP0m | Amazon amzn.to/34MlE3z | Camera Canada shrsl.com/2l7yt | Amazon Canada amzn.to/3jGoN93 | Amazon UK amzn.to/2JoSnDL | Amazon Germany amzn.to/3mFxBy1 | Ebay bit.ly/Sonya7C
Purchase the Sony a73 at B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2HTcogD | Amazon: amzn.to/2GRoG7T | Amazon Canada: amzn.to/2KhSaON | Amazon UK: amzn.to/2I3NU4D | Ebay: bit.ly/a73DA | Amazon.de: amzn.to/2Hk7fwq
Sony a9 Camera @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/2HyWIyt | Amazon amzn.to/2B4NAjh | Camera Canada shrsl.com/2ikpx | Amazon Canada amzn.to/2peQkbn | Amazon UK amzn.to/2M7XPcY | Amazon Germany amzn.to/2VHbDOP | Ebay bit.ly/Sonyalpha9
Purchase the Sony a7RIV @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/2nUgnno | Amazon amzn.to/2oGpVD1 | Camera Canada shrsl.com/2imqe | Amazon Canada amzn.to/2mY8UDW | Amazon UK amzn.to/2n9GWF3 | Amazon Germany amzn.to/2nXhene | Ebay bit.ly/a7RIVda
Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at:
B&H Photo: bhpho.to/1TA0Xge
Camera Canada: bit.ly/DLACameraCan
Ebay: bit.ly/DustineBay
Make a donation via Paypal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/dusti...
Get a discount off all Skylum Editing Software (Luminar, Aurora HDR, AirMagic) by using code DUSTINHDR at checkout: bit.ly/LuminarDLA
Become a Patron: / dustinabbott | Check me out on: Personal Website: dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: bit.ly/DLAinsta | Google+: bit.ly/24PjMzv | Facebook: on. 1nuUUeH | Twitter: bit.ly/1RyYxIH | Flickr: bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu
My filming setup: Sony a7R III: B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2D6ibNO, Camera Canada shrsl.com/2ikpr, or Amazon: amzn.to/2CNxOvH | or | Sony a9 @ B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2HyWIyt, Camera Canada shrsl.com/2ikpx, or Amazon: amzn.to/2s1vYE0
Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 RXD @B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2FA00la, Camera Canada shrsl.com/2ikq2, or Amazon amzn.to/2G2kaEr
Lights: Rotolight AEOS @B&H Photo bhpho.to/2IK7mqV | Genaray Contender @B&H Photo: bhpho.to/33HbGNM | and Aputure AL-MW: bhpho.to/2N3MtZV
DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Keywords: Tamron 70-300, Tamron 70-300mm, 70-300mm, Di III, RXD, F4.5-6.3, Tamron 70-300mm F4.5-6.3 RXD, Review, Tamron 70-300 Review, Tamron 70-300mm Review, A047, Sony a7C, Sony Alpha 7C, Sony a7C Review, ILCE-7C, Sony, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a9, sony a7III, sony a7RIII, a7R3, A047, withmytamron - Věda a technologie
Thanks for this Great review Dustin. I found this Tamron 70-300 rxd is usually underated by some reviewers, probably because it is a cheap lens. However, this Tamron is definitely a beast consider the size, weight and price. The optical performance is almost identical with the Bigma 100-400 dg dn lens on my A73. Have to say that it peforms way better than my expectation and I'd not be hesitate to recommend it to my friends if you don't pursue the best of the best tele zooms.
That's a fair point. It exceeded my expectations optically, with my only real criticism being that a lens this long deserves to have stabilization.
Helpful video thank! Ordered one to check it out, main use is my sons soccer which is outside. At this price point I can’t beat it.
For sure!
The focus ring on my Tamron 70-300 is a little gritty. I bought it new and noticed slight grit spots when moving the ring and a faint crunch noise within the first 3 days of using it. It hasn't bothered me too much, but if you're noticing the same things with your lens, you're not alone.
That's too bad. That shouldn't be the case.
Another great review thank you Dustin. Tossing up between this lens and the sigma 100-400mm. I predominantly do landscapes. Which one would you recommend to pair with an a7r3? Thank you so much. 🙏
Hmmm, if you're doing landscapes, primarily, I'd probably go with the Tamron. Easier to transport into the field, and that extra 30mm on the wide end would come in handy.
Hi Dustin! First of all I wish to say keep up the good work. Really do enjoy your reviews as they're not boring plus you give a very well balanced opinion and high knowledge without doubt. Now to my question regarding this lens. How does this compare to the new Sigma 100-400 on pure image quality alone? If we look away from price, weight and size plus the difference in range. I will only be using the lens for landscapes, on a tripod. I obviously prefer the lighter of these two, but not at the cost of a more than a minor difference in IQ. Kind regards, Jari from Sweden.
hi Jari, I wouldn't say there is any significant difference in image quality between the two. Both are excellent. The Tamron may even be a hair sharper.
Just got this lens and it’s super sharp for the price
Absolutely is.
The flip of typical longitudinal aberration is a really interesting point; I wonder if that would function like a skylight filter to reduce blue atmospheric effects on long tele backgrounds.
That would be interesting.
A great reviewer 🙏
Thank you!
Hi Dustin. Would you recommend this one over the 70-180 for traveling/landscape shots, or would you go for the that 2.8 Tammy? Is the image quality much better? Thanks for another fine review.
Probably the best travel option is the 28-200mm from Tamron that I reviewed. I like the 70-180 for event work and as a portrait lens, but for your application it sounds like the 28-200 is the best buy.
@Dustin Abbott Thank you for such a quick response! Thing is that I already have 28-75 covered... so the only question is what's better now 70-180 or 70-300. I'd love to see some compression in my landscape shots.
P.S. I don’t think I’ll be taking my tripod with me.
Oh I'm so happy finally someone have pointed out that this lens is not as compact and light as its advertised and anybody is mentioning in theirs reviews as big plus! Having my old Minolta 75-300 F 4.5-5.6(new version which still is old enough to be called an oldie!) is only 500g! And with its 55mm filter thread I'm sure it's more compact too!
Great review as always Dustin!👍
I try to call it as I see it!
The 70-300 lenses were among the most affordable telezooms for full-frame DSLRs in the past. This lenses' price is at least in the same area code as the DSLR lenses were. That alone makes it special in my eyes. Also, where can I get my private owl for outdoor lens testing?
As for the owl...I have gone on dozens if not hundreds of hikes and this is only the second time I've had a close encounter with one.
Great review. Would you recommend the lens for a Sony a7r2? Or is the IBIS in that camera not up to the task?
It would be fine, though I do think the autofocus system in the R2 is not going to make any telephoto lens perform well.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for your answer.
Thank you for this! I was thinking a lot about this lens for days! I have the 70-180mm Tamron f2.8 and so far it’s been amazing but I needed more reach. I have the A7ii and I guess I won’t have the stabilization problem. Hopefully.
It's a strong lens optically for the money, for sure.
A well done and informative review as always, Thank you! I currently use an adapted canon 70-300mm nano-usm ll lens on my Sony A7iii for walkaround shooting wildlife, birds, and dragonflies etc. It's so difficult to decide between the lightness of this tamron 70-300 rxd and the extra reach of the sigma 100-400mm for sony. I would love having that extra 100mm but is all of the extra weight of the Sigma going to be unpleasant for carrying around? Did you do much hiking around with the Sigma? Any Thoughts?
Don’t buy a Sigma. It’s overwhelmingly huge and heavy. Sharpness is equal or better with this Sigma 70-300
I own a Sigma 24-70. It’s needlessly huge and heavy.
I don't find the size and weight of the Sigma unbearable, but this lens is definitely more compact and light if that is a potential issue for you.
Hi, can you please let me know how Canon 70-300 usm II performs on your A7III (which adapter have you got?)
I am thinking of buying this canon lens with MC11 for my a7III instead of Tamron as this one have IS
@@MC-yk4wl the Canon 70-300 adapted to my Sony a73 worked very well with the mc-11 adapter. Since the Sony camera has stabilization in the body I really prefer the compactness and lightweight of the Tamron 70-300 rxd. It's so crazy small and light and I really like it. Either lens will do well but the Tamron 70-300 rxd was specifically designed for the Sony mirrorless system and it weighs less than the other lens with an adapter. I haven't noticed any stabilization problems just using the camera body stabilization. I actually have that Canon 70-300mm nano-usm for sale on the Facebook photography sales Pages until Monday when I have to return it back to Best Buy. I got it for $575 including shipping which is about what I'll get back if I return it. This is a newer one that I recently re-purchased for my Canon R6 about a month ago but now I have the rf100-400 mm and no longer need it.
I have had this lens for some time and enjoyed it for candid photos at events and for bird identification. It is so sharp in these applications that I thought to use it in taking photos of shells on the beach for jigsaw puzzles. Wrong choice: the corners were mushy and this would be very noticeable to someone puzzling over pieces. I looked up your video to find out why. It's good to know 1) it's not just my copy of the lens, and 2) it only happens at the short end of the range.
I use an aps-c camera and this effect is pronounced even with the cropped sensor.
That's interesting, as with an APS-C camera some of the corners are cropped off.
Dustin, thank you so much for this review! I'm a big fan of your work. I remember you saw bokeh onion rings when reviewing 28-200. Considering the small aperture, do you think bokeh is just as disturbing in high contrast? If you mentioned it in the video, I apologize - I might have spaced out.
I didn't really see onion bokeh with the 70-300.
Thank you for a thorough and level-headed review!
Do you find handheld shots to be easier with i.e. the Sigma 100-400? I'm considering it over this, but the weight makes me wonder if the OS will really be that much of an advantage on an A7Rii. I suppose for landscapes one mostly uses a tripod anyways which negates the benefit and the Sigma utilizes a slightly more closed aperture.
That really depends on the subject. I didn't see a serious deficiency when shooting action, as I try to keep the shutter speed up. I honestly didn't see a ton of issues due to motion blur during my review with this lens, but your mileage may vary. But yes, the Sigma would be a little easier to handhold...though it is heaver, obviously.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Glad to hear that. I'm honestly not convinced that the loss of aperture and added weight will mean there's a huge difference, in the end. I'm leaning strongly towards the Tamron.
@@RohannvanRensburg Did u purchase Tamron?
@@SaikSaketh I did. I'm reasonably happy with it. Considering cost, weight, etc it's a versatile and useful lens. I'm not doing portrait sessions or professional work, I'm mainly outside doing landscapes and doing second-shooting for outdoor weddings on occasion, so it being light, weather resistant and quick is good. At f/8 it's pretty clean at 300mm too. I'm not that convinced OS would make that much of a difference.
@@RohannvanRensburg Great, I made a purchase of it during the Helsinki Airshow, Found it useful and no complain yet, thanks for taking time to reply. If you are on unsplash, would love to follow.
Could you compare this lens to the Sony FE 70-300 4.5-5.6?
Unfortunately I don't have either lens on hand right now, so probably not.
Thanks for the excellent review! With an A9 at 300mm, what roughly is the success rate at a shutter speed of 1/80?
I would say it is reasonably high.
Would you recommend this lens, the equivalent canon version, or the canon L series 70-200mm without IS on the Canon 7d Mark II? I’m mainly looking to photograph birds with the lens. My priorities really are the image quality, mainly the sharpness and also having a reasonable performance in medium light (like about an hour before sunset) so I don’t have to lower the shutter a lot. Or is there another lens in this price range that you’d suggest? Your help would really be appreciated!
This particular lens isn't available for Canon - it is only for Sony mirrorless. The Canon 70-300 IS II is probably the best choice for your application.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Ohh, thank you! One last question, would you say the image quality/sharpness of the L series 70-200mm (without IS) is comparable to the one you have suggested?
You'll probably get better real world results in many situations due to having image stabilization.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Right. Thanks a lot!
I bought this lens the day it came out and haven’t taken it off my a7iii since. It’s a joy to use. Sharpness is unbelievable even at 300. I’m guessing it’s using same optics as 28-75. If you’re worried about 6.3 set iso to auto. Sony has no issues with ISO up to 1600
It's definitely a very strong performer...particularly for the money.
Great review. It definitely seems like a good, cheap lens. I just wish it was stabilized, as I do video more than photo and can't adjust the shutter speed as easily (or I wish the stabilized alternatives were cheaper)
Side note, if you organize the description's timestamps into separate lines, CZcams will automatically add chapter markers to the video. I find it to be a super handy feature!
That's a useful tip. Thank you.
Do you have a review of the Sony 70-300? In my country u can buy it second hand close in price to the tamron. Do u think the Sony is better? Thanks
I haven't ever reviewed the Sony 70-300, though I hope to get to it sometime this year.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks!
Great Review Dustin. I am looking for a lens to cover baseball games. Would this give me enough reach for that?
I would say yes, though you won't be able to pull in distance fielders and fill the frame with them.
Nice comparison shots DA.
As I already said it, I find just awkward that Tamron delivered years back a 70-300 usd f4-5.6 with 9 aperture blades, to deliver today an f4.5-6.3 of 7 aperture blades... Yeah ok, the weight and size aren't the same but the results won't be the same neither.
The older one also had a maximum magnification of 0.25x against now just under 0.2x... I'm still not sure if all of this can be considered positives...
Anyhoo nice overall review with all the important aspects covered 👍
I'm familiar with the lens you reference, though to be fair, that was designed around completely different mounts and focus systems. This new lens is optically superior and also focuses faster. Not everything is improved, obviously, but it's a strong value.
One of the versions (yr 2000) was 455 grams - most other brands all had the same range aperture at aprox 500gms. I have a 300 5.6 prime that weighs 500gms (metal)& also a voigtlander skopar 70-300 at 500gms. So I did expect it a bit lighter. Not sure how significantly better the optics are (usually the coatings are better & AF tracking & silent motors - also with calibrated software profiles)
Looking forward to watching this review. Interested to see if you feel like lacking stabilization in the lens is a big concern.
Why not watch first and comment after? IBIS is a champ, no stabilization concerns down to 1/15 shutter.
@@Arcticfox7 I’ll comment when I want to ;), thanks for your concern though
That's definitely discussed there.
@@DustinAbbottTWI And your results concure with what Matt Granger tested years ago and what Jared Polin said a few days ago @300mm about this very same Tamron 70-300 👌👍
I am a begginer and just got the a7c with Sony 24 to 105 and hesitating between sigma 100 400 and this Tamron to complete my range. Can you please advise?
Sigma 100-400 is very large, super heavy lens. It’s not for casual use. Not for handheld use. Not to mention the price difference.
I personally love Tamron colors over sigma or Sony lenses
@@Arcticfox7 You've got some valid points there. On the other hand the sigma has more reach and image stabilization. I don't know how they compare in terms of sharpness, but they both seem to be pretty sharp. I'm torn between the two. Personally I think I'll wait and see what Tamron comes up with next :) They are on a roll with their Sony lens production :D I only have one lens so far, the Tamron 28-75 that I'm super happy with.
The Sigma weighs 1135g. That is twice as heavy as the Tamron, but far from being "not for casual use" or for "handheld use". It's actually rather light for that kind of lens. The Tamron is much smaller, yes, but there isn't a lighter lens covering the 100-400mm range for full frame.
@@DustinAbbottTWI there is something about huge lenses, they make you stand out. I dont like that extra, unwelcomed attention. It makes you look like a pro.
Now I am expecting 200-600 f/5.6 from Tamron to pair with their 28-200 f/2.8-5.6. Also a lightweight 16 f/2.8
I'd love the former lens, for sure.
How do you feel it compares to the 28-200 over shared focal lengths?
The corners are sharper on the 70-300mm, but the center and mid-frame are surprisingly similar.
My experience typically is that lenses with bigger zoom ratios tend to have poorer optical performance. The 28-200 is a surprise in this metric.
I will buy this len
Enjoy!
I got a bit spoiled by the rest of Tamron zooms, so I expected this one would also give the APS-C system a run for the money in the size department. Unfortunately, it's not even close. It's expected that typical 55-200 F4.5-6.3 for APS-C is way smaller, but even if we get something with similar shallow DoF performance, such as Fujifilm 55-200 F/3.5-4.8, is both smaller and lighter. I have a feeling that Tamron should have pulled out the smaller package, given the fact this is 4.5-6.3 (and not 4.5-5.6) and lack of OIS + benefits of mirrorless lens design.
I think they went for optical excellence instead, and it is very, very good.
if you could get one, this or the sigma 100-400 dg dn?
That's not really the question to ask. Who cares what I would do...what do YOU need? Both lenses have good autofocus and are optically excellent. Is longer reach or more portability your priority?
After much flip flopping between this and the sony lens for my a7r4, I decided on the tamron due to significantly less weight and sharp images other than at 70mm (which I have covered with another zoom anyway). The sony 70-300 has not really been getting great reviews on image sharpness and is much heavier not to ignore over twice the price!
I think you'll be happy with the Tamron.
People need to keep in mind that while Tamron is it's own company so to speak, Sony has now about a 17% market share ownership in them (was 12% about 4-5 years ago and increased in the past few years), so we would expect good support for Sony products from Tamron.
That's fair.
I have Tamron's 28-75mm and I am considering adding this lens to take care of the telephoto end. The thing is, I've noticed that many times I'd rather carry a single lens with me when exploring a new place, so I'm leaning towards getting the 28-200mm instead and selling the 28-75. Gotta test both of these lenses to find out. Excellent review!
Both options are valid, though if you are are a single lens person, the 28-200mm is an excellent choice.
I have the 28-75 and am debating the same, but with 28-200 you're losing the f/2.8. If you have both it's not an issue, but I'm leaning more towards the 28-75 + 70-300 than selling the 28-75 for a lens that doesn't do either end particularly well. 28-200 is unprecidented for it's all-in-one nature though, especially at the price.
@@RohannvanRensburg I mean with the 28-200 you still get f/4 at 70mm so are you really giving up that much in exchange for a single lens travel setup. The usual knock on superzooms is image quality but Dustin's review is full of praise on that
@@neaorin For a single-lens travel setup it's extremely hard to beat the 28-200, f/4 is more than good enough. If I do more travel in the future I may well pick up that lens as well.
will this work with canon m50? thanks
Unfortunately not. At this point it only comes in Sony E mount.
Bought this lens last week. Zero regrets. Super sharp, super light and portable. Exactly what I need. My only complaint is that there's no AF/MF button, which I use a lot. Not a big deal though.
Not surprised. It's a very sharp lens.
How can you list that as a negative when new Sony full frame cameras have about 10 customizable buttons which can be set as AF/MF?
@@Arcticfox7 I've used up all of the custom buttons and even remapped the existing ones for other functions. Also I'm already in the habit of using the MF/AF switch. Like I said, it's not a big deal given the price.
How is it 550 dollars but 650 gbp in the UK?!
It's frustrating, I know, but the problem is that pricing is based on exchange rates with the Japanese Yen, not the US dollar.
It is small. You are comparing to shorter focal length lenses when you say it is same size but it s way smaller than anything that goes to 300mm. Just like you did not want to compare it to the lens that goes to 400mm to call it smaller.
With all due respect, I showed the chart comparing it to other 70-300mm lenses, of which it isn't smaller. It's actually longer than the Sony 70-300 G lens.