Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 
Log in or register to remove ads.

Third-Party Pentax Lenses - Reviews and Database » Tamron Lenses » Zoom Lenses
Tamron AF Di LD Macro 70-300mm F4-5.6 Review RSS Feed

Tamron AF Di LD Macro 70-300mm F4-5.6

Sharpness 
 7.6
Aberrations 
 5.9
Bokeh 
 7.5
Handling 
 7.6
Value 
 9.0
Reviews Views Date of last review
63 228,698 Wed November 22, 2023
spacer
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
90% of reviewers $136.11 7.49
Tamron AF Di LD Macro 70-300mm F4-5.6
supersize


Description:

Compact tele-zoom lens with macro 1:2 function. A Macro Switchover mechanism allows a minimum focus distance of 0.95m within the focal length range of 180-300mm. This allows for a maximum magnification ratio of 1:2.


Tamron AF 70-300mm F4-5.6 Di LD Macro
© www.pentaxforums.com, sharable with attribution
Image Format
Full-frame / 35mm film
Lens Mount
Pentax K
Aperture Ring
No
Diaphragm
Automatic, 9 blades
Optics
13 elements, 9 groups
Mount Variant
KAF
Check camera compatibility
Max. Aperture
F4-5.6
Min. Aperture
F32-45
Focusing
AF (screwdrive)
Quick-shift
No
Min. Focus
95 cm
Max. Magnification
0.5x
Filter Size
62 mm
Internal Focus
No
Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)

APS-C: 23-5.5 ° / 19.5-4.6 °
Full frame: 34-8 ° / 29-7 °
Hood
Included
Case
Lens Cap
Included
Coating
Multi-coated
Weather Sealing
No
Other Features
Diam x Length
76.6x117 mm (3x4.6 in.)
Weight
435 g (15.3 oz.)
Production Years
to 2018
Pricing
USD current price
Engraved Name
Tamron AF 70-300mm F4-5.6 Di LD Macro
Product Code
A17
Reviews
User reviews



This lens has the tamron reference A17. there is also an ?earlier version the 572D, this has smooth rubber grips, similar specs.
Mount Type: Pentax KAF2/KAF (screwdrive AF)
Price History:



Add Review of Tamron AF Di LD Macro 70-300mm F4-5.6
Author:
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 46-60 of 63
Veteran Member

Registered: November, 2008
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 1,444
Review Date: January 26, 2010 Recommended | Price: None indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Lightweight, easy to hand hold, produces excellent and sharp images
Cons: Can be a bit soft at the edges

I bought this soon after buying my K200D with kit lens, last year. It lives in my bag, and even though I later thought to replace it and the kit lens with the walkabout 18-250, thats what stays home, and this always comes with me.

There's been a lot of comment about whether its sharp enough: I think it is, for most purposes. Perhaps if you are shooting for National Geographic, it won't do, but for Joe Average its just fine. The relative low cost also helps.

[edit] Shots replaced because the originals I posted seem to have vaporised.


Native Miner by kyte50, on Flickr


Eastern Water Dragon by kyte50, on Flickr
   
Veteran Member

Registered: December, 2006
Location: Spring, TX.
Posts: 1,157
Review Date: December 27, 2009 Recommended | Price: $160.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Sharp, light weight, cheap.
Cons: Cheap, purple fringing, otating front element

Can't add much to what's already been stated.

This lens is cheap which is a pro and a con. It's a con because it is not durable at all. My second copy in less than two years died. The zoom ring doesn't zoom anymore. It's a pro because it is cheap to replace.
   
Senior Member

Registered: August, 2007
Location: Houston
Posts: 159
Review Date: November 2, 2009 Recommended | Price: $139.00 | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: cost, reach, macro
Cons: PF/CA, softness, no very contrasty, build quality, etc

When I was in the market for some reach on the tele end, my budget was pretty tight. So it came down to this vs. the Sigma equivalent. I choose poorly.

The purple fringing is mentioned a lot for a reason...it is a killer for this lens. Yes, you can remove it in post-processing, but it will still leave a halo/trace.

It's soft. No way around it. In the aforementioned 90-200 range it does ok, but it's still pretty darn soft in general compared to other, admittedly pricier, models. Which should be expected. I have not found it to accent contrast very well, though I have gotten some nice bokeh opened up...at the expense of sharpening.

The AF is slow. and loud. and not very accurate, especially at low light. I have been embarrased on bird watching hikes as the noise of my lens has scared up coveys of birds. It's like a steam powered machine needing oil or something.

The build quality is relatively solid, though I have had problems with my copy. The rubber grip on the focus ring has come loose, almost as if it is too big for the ring.

If you absolutely can't afford better, which hey, either could I, then it is more than worth the price. Just don't expect to get pictures that look anything like the stuff taken with nicer models, unless the conditions are PERFECT, and you are very lucky. If possible, save up for something better if you can...this is a bit of a false economy in that you won't be very happy with it overall.

Sadly, that being said, it stays on my k20d a lot for lack of something better. There really needs to be something to fill the donut hole in the market between these low end zooms and the higher priced ones....
   
Senior Member

Registered: June, 2009
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 242
Review Date: October 9, 2009 Recommended | Price: $125.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Low cost and versatililty
Cons: CA/PF

Hard to beat this lens for it's decent IQ, 1:2 macro ability and range for this small of a price tag. Throw a Raynox-150 on it and you get a extremely good low cost alternative to a dedicated macro lens.

Purple fringing is the only real drawback of this lens, but as others have noted, you can fix with post processing if needed.

240mm


300mm


   
Review Date: September 29, 2009 Recommended | Price: $150.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: good range, cheap, build quality
Cons: image quality

its a bit difficult to rate the lens. when i bought a 70-300, i think i can shoot on 200-300ish mm easily. But the image quality of the lens on that range let me down.

How ever from 70-180mm, the lens gives very good images, especially on f/5.6-8.

so its a bit difficult to say whether the lens is good or bad. However if we consider the money spent and the build quality, this lens is a bargain.

I don't have this lens anymore, and upgrade it to tele prime lens.
   
New Member

Registered: June, 2008
Location: Pireaus, Greece
Posts: 18
Review Date: September 26, 2009 Recommended | Price: $150.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Very good for the price, acceptable resolution (if you don't Pixel-Peeper), good macro
Cons: A little low contrast ...

Well the negatives are as the others mention.
But I will stand, more, to what you have to do if you want to take the most of the lens.

At 300 you have to go to f/11 and 1/200 for hand held, to be sure, for the perfect shot


moon 300, f/11 and 1/80, ISO 200, hand held (croped a little)


of course, you can have very good photos on higher apertures
300, f/6.3, 1/800


Generaly for focal length 180 and upward, the maximum aperture have to be the 6.3. As I mention before you can take the best at f/11 and up

At 70 and f/5.6 is ok (and the max f/4 is acceptable)


At 180 - f/11 - 1/6 (tripod) nearly perfect!


After all I add up that this lens was made for the range 90- 200.
Maybe tamron decided to rich the limits, for having better versatility (not bad thought), but with the cost of performance/speed at both ends (less at 70 more at 300).
At the range of 90-200 you can easily use the aperture range, from 5.6 (6.3) to 22 with good to excellent results!
The best comes from f/11 to f/16 for all focal lengths
   
Junior Member

Registered: February, 2009
Location: Ireland
Posts: 31
Review Date: September 18, 2009 Recommended | Price: $128.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Light, cheap, great bang for buck
Cons: Not great above 250mm

I bought this as a simple cheap AF lens to put into action when the conditions warranted it. Mostly I shoot with manual, but found an AF would be useful from time to time.
This particular purchase isn't one I've regretted. It's had a few serious workouts and came up trumps on every occasion, with an extremely high percentage of keeper shots. The AF may be a bit slow and noisy, but I find it to be accurate and reliable so far, at least in summer conditions. Sharpness, contrast and colour rendition are good. Optically it's at its best below 250mm, but it's not that >250 is bad, just not as good.


Irish Conker Championship, Freshford 2009 by Lensosaurus, on Flickr


band leader by Lensosaurus, on Flickr


flautist-sore-lip by Lensosaurus, on Flickr


A Surfeit of Santas by Lensosaurus, on Flickr


IMGP1949 by Lensosaurus, on Flickr
   
Site Supporter

Registered: July, 2007
Location: Arnold, Md.
Posts: 762
Review Date: September 6, 2009 Recommended | Price: $138.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Light, low cost
Cons: Dont have any

I've been miffed that my version doesen't want to duplicate the PF everyone whines about. The images shown on this Forum with the PF seem to barely exhibet the condition and were taken usually under poor lighting. I'm more than satisfied with wide open or really stopped down performance.
   
Veteran Member

Registered: April, 2009
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 1,270
Review Date: June 13, 2009 Recommended | Price: $133.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: price, sharpness, build quality, size/weight, macro, close-focusing relative to other 300mm zooms
Cons: CA/PF, slow AF, color cast

In light of the price, this lens is amazing. Many of my favorite wildlife shots were taken with this lens. Sharp throughout it's range when stopped down. AF is slow - slower than on the Pentax FA 80-320. My copy of this lens had very bad PF, and even a purple-ish color cast on grays, so post-processing is a must. I sold my 1st copy, and have regretted that so much that I have a new one on order.

The "macro" is actually 1:2, and I've found it to be extremely useful, particularly when taking pictures of dragonflies.

If you are not willing to post-process, I would avoid this lens.

Update (6/17): just got in my 2nd copy of this lens, and in addition to the virtues of my 1st, it has little less PF. Yay!
   
Senior Member

Registered: March, 2009
Location: Gouda, Netherlands
Posts: 165
Review Date: April 5, 2009 Recommended | Price: $150.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Cheap, macro, lightweight, sharp at all lenghts
Cons: Purple Frining, no quick shift.

Cheap lens for birdwatching. I think this is a good deal if you don't have more money The PF in the 200-300 is a little bit annoying.

With this lens I replaced my F100-300 with no second of regret.

regards,

Cor
   
Forum Member

Registered: December, 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 69
Review Date: March 28, 2009 Recommended | Price: $148.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Cheap........
Cons: You get what you pay for.......

Wanted a decent tele with a macro feature without breaking the bank. Out of a couple of hundred photos with this lens, I really didn't have many I could be proud of. Even though it is nicely made in the Tamron tradition, it is hard to get a photo that really pops out at you with the wow factor. I find it soft at all focal lengths and apertures. Just doesn't have that Pentax quality resolution. And the macro feature can be a pain engaging and disengaging. I finally gave in and purchased the Pentax DA 50-300. Now there is a nice prosumer super tele.
   
Veteran Member

Registered: March, 2007
Location: St Louis, Missouri U S A
Posts: 2,464
Review Date: January 22, 2009 Recommended | Price: $169.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharpness, color, macro ability
Cons: purple fringing in high contrast scenes

This was the first new lens I bought, and I have used it quite a bit. As others have said, it is an absolute steal for the price!! It is ( for a 70-300 zoom ) quite light, and easy to hand hold even @ 300 mm. Sharpness is good to me, even at 300 mm. I have taken a lot of flower "macro" shots with this lens, and the only time it fails, is "user error" I have also used it a lot at the zoo, and it never disappoints me there either. There is the dreaded purple fringe, but other than that, I am very satisfied with this lens.
   
Site Supporter

Registered: December, 2008
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 428
Review Date: January 4, 2009 Recommended | Price: $190.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Range, Price, weight/size
Cons: Purple fringing, Performance beyond 200mm
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 6    Bokeh: 7    Handling: 7    Value: 9   

Great price and value but the lens has Purple fringing beyond 250 and is not as sharp beyond 200. Also contrast declines beyond 250.

However, below 200 it is very good (I am pretty amazed at 70mm). Focus can be problematic on K10D.

Utility: 9
Sharpness: 7
CA:6
Contrast: 7
Build quality: 7
Auto Focus: 7
EDIT IN 2013: Now that I have lots of experience with long prime and zoom lenses, this lens is slightly less than when I did the review in 2009. The Pentax 55-300 is so much better and the new tamorn 70-300 has been reported to be better as well....

If you can afford better, buy better.
   
Veteran Member

Registered: February, 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,056
Review Date: May 4, 2008 Recommended | Price: $160.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: great value, very decent IQ, good build quality
Cons: rotating front element, PF (but what do you expect at this price point?)

I have been surprised at how good a lens this is. It really is sharp, at least in the center, which is probably more important than edge sharpness in a tele-zoom. The build quality is at least on par with Pentax DA-series zoom lenses, and certainly better than FA-series zooms. Sure there is purple fringing in high-contrast situations, but that is easy enough to fix later. All in all a great value. A worthy placeholder until I can afford some telephoto primes...
   
Veteran Member

Registered: March, 2007
Posts: 3,381
Review Date: April 22, 2008 Recommended | Price: $129.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Sharp, light weight, inexpensive
Cons: CA, slow focus, soft after 210mm

Pros: Sharp from 70-210mm rates a 9; Soft above 210mm rates a 7 (can sharpen nicely in PP); Not a true macro, but very good macro capability, rates an 8; Inexpensive, a bargain for the $'s.

Cons: CA or purple fringing in high contrast shots (requires additional software\cost to remove).

This is a great lens if you are budget conscious, want to gain experience or determine if wildlife shooting is for you. If you are careful when shooting in high contrast situations, you will be pleased with this lens. It is capable of producing very good images.

Build quality is fair and the macro function is a bit quirky.
Add Review of Tamron AF Di LD Macro 70-300mm F4-5.6



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:23 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top