Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    71

    Tamron 28-200 AF lens compatible with D80?

    Will a Tamron 28-200 AF lens work with a Nikon D80?

    I have this lens on my old Nikon N70 (predigital SLR).

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    554
    http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35698 check out this thread from the other week
    Nikon D7000 - Nikkor AF-S 70-200vrII f2.8 | Nikkor AF-S 105vr f2.8 Micro | Nikkor AF-S 16-85 | Nikkor AF-D 35mm f2 |Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro | SB-700 | SB-600


    Website

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by ssil2000 View Post
    http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35698 check out this thread from the other week
    Thanks, but the posts were were over my head. Can you (or anyone) interpret?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    That Tamron 28-200mm should work fine on a D80.
    The only thing that will be different is that the field of view will change:
    from 28-200mm to 42-300mm.

    So you will gain in the long end, and lose in the wide end. Take that onto consideration (and if you use the wide end often, get a Nikon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 lens to accompany your old Tamron).

    Otherwise, you can also consider getting other lenses. But since you have that lens, you can start with it and see if you are content with the combination.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by coldrain View Post
    That Tamron 28-200mm should work fine on a D80.
    The only thing that will be different is that the field of view will change:
    from 28-200mm to 42-300mm.

    So you will gain in the long end, and lose in the wide end. Take that onto consideration (and if you use the wide end often, get a Nikon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 lens to accompany your old Tamron).

    Otherwise, you can also consider getting other lenses. But since you have that lens, you can start with it and see if you are content with the combination.
    Sweet!
    The lens obviously does not have image stabilization, but neither did my ancient 70-300 manual focus lens for my ancient Minolta X700 back in the old tripod days.

    I was prepared for you to tell me the lens would not be compatible, and was looking at getting the following combo from Costco for $1.5k:
    -D80
    -18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S Zoom-NIKKOR Lens
    -70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR Lens with optical image stabilization

    So the 28-200 lens I have will be equiv to a 42-300...Other than the
    -42 vs 70
    -image stabilization on the 70-300

    what other differences would you see between these 2 lenses?

    Or does that 70-300 really mean eg 110-450 in digital terms???

    Sorry, I'm still used to old pre-digital numbers.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    the d80, as with 99% of other dslr's out, there has a cropped sensor. in your case 1.5x. so you need to multiply the focal lengths of every lens you have by 1.5.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    the d80, as with 99% of other dslr's out, there has a cropped sensor. in your case 1.5x. so you need to multiply the focal lengths of every lens you have by 1.5.
    uhmm... Canon 350D/400D/40D/1DmkIII/Nikon D40/D40x/D80/D300/Sony A100/A700/Olympus E330/E410/E510/E3/Panasonic L1/L10/Pentax K100/K10/Sigma SD14

    vs

    Canon 1Ds MK III/5D/Nikon D3

    That is more like 84.2% have a cropped sensor, Rooz

    tjh, the 28-200mm Tamron may lack some sharpness for today's standards. But you can try out first, and then make a decision of what lenses you would like to add.

    Personally I would avoid the 18-135mm, because of its vignetting, barrel distortion and such... but that is just me. The 70-300 VR is a nice (and heavy) lens to have, the cheapest way to have a good 300mm (450mm 35mm film equivalent) lens on Nikon. I'd pair it with the 18-55mm kit lens from Nikon, because it is light, cheap, and surprisingly good. And a nice match with the 70-300.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    6,931
    Coldy forgot to ad the Samsung DSLR's and the D200 so his maths has been found wanting.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by coldrain View Post
    Personally I would avoid the 18-135mm, because of its vignetting, barrel distortion and such... but that is just me. The 70-300 VR is a nice (and heavy) lens to have, the cheapest way to have a good 300mm (450mm 35mm film equivalent) lens on Nikon. I'd pair it with the 18-55mm kit lens from Nikon, because it is light, cheap, and surprisingly good. And a nice match with the 70-300.
    Excellent thoughts.

    However Costco currently has an offer on the 18-135 and 70-300 combo that would save $100-150 compared to most other sites.

    Also, photozone's review of the 18-55 was not too great. Their review of the 18-135 seemed happier:
    http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...6_II/index.htm
    http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...3556/index.htm

    At 18mm comparing SMIA TV Distortion
    55: 2.72%
    135: 3.36%

    Basically the differences between the 2:
    -18-55: costs perhaps $100 less; little less distortion;
    -18-135: more versatile lens; would not need the 70-300 as much; switch lenses less often.

    for 70-135 focal lengths, which lens would do a better job?
    -18-135; lighter
    -70-300; heavier; has image stabilization

    BTW weight may make some difference for me b/c I have carpal tunnel in my Right arm.

    Thanks, I'd like to make a decision today.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    6,931
    Quote Originally Posted by tjh View Post
    Also, photozone's review of the 18-55 was not too great. Their review of the 18-135 seemed happier
    If you based your life around reviews on Internet sites you would never buy anything because for every positive review there is an equally negative one somewhere.
    The REALITY is the the 18-55 is a great little lens that will has has produced millions of excellent images in the hands of tens of thousands of users.
    Rather than reading theoretical reviews that are often biased, inaccurate or incomprehensible to most people the best place to check out any lens is to go to photo hosting sites like Flickr or Smugmug and search for real world photos taken by that lens in situations similar to the photography you envisage for yourself.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •