Originally posted by Susinok 
I'm starting to think of telephoto lenses. Is the Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR DI Autofocus really that bad? I bought it right before I discovered this forum, and it's not rated very highly here at all. What is a good replacement for it? I'd prefer a zoom, but could be convinced to get a prime.
I'd love to get my hands on a Bigma, but it's a bit above my price range. A dedicated 300mm seems like a good idea. Maybe an older lens. Any suggestions?
Also I do plan to use my Tamron until I get something better. How do you coax the best performance out of it?
The real problem with older lenses is purple fringing, they aren't correct for CA as much as modern lenses and the purple fringing can be disturbing. And to get good quality older lens, in telephoto they are hard to find and expensive. My dream for awhile was to save money and get a faster lens like an FA* 300 2.8. I found one at $3500 and subsequent searches have shown that's a pretty good deal for one. You look at that and a DA* 300 ƒ4 doesn't seem so bad.
I use an A-400 as much as possible, it's consumer quality 400, but if shoot at bird above me in a tree, the purple fringing makes the images almost too bad to post. Sure I can et rid of it, with an hour or so of post processing, and sometimes even that doesn't work. We have an old F-70-210 that's an awesome telephoto, but you have to be aware, any high contrast of severe back light situation is going to lead to fringing. The Older 300s all cost money as far as I know. I've looked in to couple of FA 300 4.5s as well, it's a great lens, but not much cheaper than the DA*, slower and old instead of new with a warranty. I also recently saw an older A-300 2.8 with an asking price of $1700.
In telephotos, the only way to get good is to pay. Too many people want one...the second hand market can't keep up with demand. Or else get lucky. Every now and then someone sells one cheap and someone gets a deal, just so far not me.
Post #4 by rbefly
Similar Threads 
