Nikon versus Tamron lense - is this salesman correct?

[gng]

Hello,
My daughter has a Nikon SLR (D60, I think) and is looking for a 10X zoom. We went into a photo store and the salesman said that Tamron now makes Nikon lenses, so buy the Tamron instead as it's cheaper. Is this true? I have a hard time believing that Nikon, which is famous for it's lenses, now farms it out to Tamron.

Second question - Assuming that Tamron does not make Nikon lenses, is the quality the same? I used to be a pretty serious 35mm photographer and the 3rd party lenses were always considered a step down, but perhaps things have changed.

Thanks!

Gary

[jway32]

Gary,

I do not know about your question but I do know that you came to the right place. These guys know everything about DSLR's. I'm sure someone can help you.

[D Thompson]

Hello,
My daughter has a Nikon SLR (D60, I think) and is looking for a 10X zoom. We went into a photo store and the salesman said that Tamron now makes Nikon lenses, so buy the Tamron instead as it's cheaper. Is this true? I have a hard time believing that Nikon, which is famous for it's lenses, now farms it out to Tamron.

Second question - Assuming that Tamron does not make Nikon lenses, is the quality the same? I used to be a pretty serious 35mm photographer and the 3rd party lenses were always considered a step down, but perhaps things have changed.

Thanks!

Gary

Tamron doesn't make Nikon lenses per se, they just make lenses that will fit a Nikon, Canon, etc. Yes, it will be cheaper than a Nikon made lens which will have Nikon on it. No farming out to Tamron.

2nd question will probably get answered both ways. Some like and use the 3rd party lenses, some don't. Personally, I don't have any 3rd party lenses, nor do I want one. I know a few other photogs that use them and love them. One of them many choices to make I guess ;).

[coldrain]

The only lenses from Nikon that have a clear relationship with Tamron are the 2 older 70-300 lenses.

Some lenses from Tamron are very good (like the 90mm and 180mm macro lenses), and some are not. You can not make a blanket statement about Tamron lenses (or Nikon lenses, for that matter).

The Tamron 18-250mm lens is very good for its sort, and has the biggest reach. The Nikon 18-200 VR is more expensive, less reach, but offers image stabilization. If the Nikon is too expensive for your budget, but you would really like the lens to offer image stabilization, you can take a look at the Sigma 18-200 OS, which is also a good lens for the type.

[gng]

The only lenses from Nikon that have a clear relationship with Tamron are the 2 older 70-300 lenses.

Some lenses from Tamron are very good (like the 90mm and 180mm macro lenses), and some are not. You can not make a blanket statement about Tamron lenses (or Nikon lenses, for that matter).

The Tamron 18-250mm lens is very good for its sort, and has the biggest reach. The Nikon 18-200 VR is more expensive, less reach, but offers image stabilization. If the Nikon is too expensive for your budget, but you would really like the lens to offer image stabilization, you can take a look at the Sigma 18-200 OS, which is also a good lens for the type.

Thanks - I did not think that Tamron made Nikon lenses (versus Tamron making lenses that fit on a Nikon). I also did not know that the 18-250 has no IS. I really appreciate everyone getting back to me so fast.

[shirlock1]

I was at my local camera store and the clerk told me that tamnaron had tried a feature that was not called Is BUT WAS like it. They pulled it back but shortly arte going to reintroduce it. Does anyone know about this feature and whether it would be comperable to nikon/canon IS features?

[erichlund]

I was at my local camera store and the clerk told me that tamnaron had tried a feature that was not called Is BUT WAS like it. They pulled it back but shortly arte going to reintroduce it. Does anyone know about this feature and whether it would be comperable to nikon/canon IS features?

The best policy is to believe what is on the shelf. I worked in retail while I worked on my Master's Degree, and sometimes I just couldn't believe the "data" coming out of some sales people's mouths.

Tamron has a website. If they have not announced this intent on their website, then I would be leery about what I'm told by a sales person.

[coldrain]

Tamron was going to introduce the 28-300 VC a few months ago. VC (Vibration Control) is Tamron's name for image stabilization.

They did push the introduction date forward because of a problem with the lens. When it weill be available is unknown to me.

[JTL]

Thanks - I did not think that Tamron made Nikon lenses (versus Tamron making lenses that fit on a Nikon). I also did not know that the 18-250 has no IS. I really appreciate everyone getting back to me so fast.I have the Sigma 18-200mm OS and it is a very good image stabilized lens. Is it on par optically with the Nikon 18-200 VR? No, not quite. Is it's price/performance ratio acceptable? Most definitely.

[Glasstream15]

I have a Tamron 18-200 for my Canon XT. Is it a great lens? No. Is it a good lens? Definitely. And way cheaper than I could get from Canon. And cheaper and probably not quite as good as the Sigma 18-200 OS which has optical stabilization. And the Tamron 18-250 is supposed to be better than the 18-200, but I am not gonna swap out right now. Gotta save a few pennies again.

I also have a canon K2 35 mm film SLR with kit 28-90 and a Canon 70-300 USM III, both of which fit the XT. And that 70-300 was less than $200 new from Amazon. Is it a cheap lens? Of course. Is it a great lens? NO. Does it work and make good pictures? Nah, but using it I make some nice ones. Are there both OEM and third party lenses equivalent but higher quality, of course for more money? Definitely.

Third party lenses, Tamron and Sigma are what I'm most familiar with but I hear Tokina are good too, are very good. OEMs make both cheap and expensive lenses. And I know, and I do not have any because they are very expensive, that Canon, again I have Canon, "L" lenses are incredible. Both optically and mechanically. They are tops in image quality and there are no lenses anywhere built better. Nikon, Nikkor I think they call theirs, also makes fantastic top quality lenses and a cheaper line.

But in lenses, as in everything connected with photography, you really do get what you pay for. Of course, as in all tech stuff like cameras, audio, and many other things, there is a point of diminishing returns. You reach a point where a 50% increase in price will net a 5% increase in quality. Of course, there is that certain indefinable something about owning that "L" lens, even if you are a weekend photographer.

YMMV