Interactive Lens Reviews and Opinion.
Digital Camera Reviews

Reviews Views Date of last review
8 254006 12/11/2010
Recommended By Average Purchase
100% of reviewers $612.67
Reader Review Rating Averages
Readers' rating for
Construction Quality
Readers' rating for
Image Quality
Overall Rating

Keywords: Tamron Canon Nikon Wide Mid Tele Zoom APS-C Di-II LD VC Stabilized Tested


Registered: December 2010
Posts: 7
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro AF review by grule
Review Date: 12/11/2010 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $599.00| Rating: 10 

Pros: great range,good build,versatile,good optics
Cons: sharpness at longer FL

Much better than it has any right to long as you stop it down a little.

The range from 18-130mm is really good.Above that it softens progressively.But even at 270mm is not bad stopped down.

Truly a one-lens solution.I never hesitate to pick this lens up when I want a light-weight,simple kit.Highly recommended!

Registered: March 2010
Posts: 2
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro AF review by Luv2Jeep
Review Date: 3/23/2010 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $600.00| Rating: 9 

Pros: VC works well, wide zoom range
Cons: AF misses occasionaly

My initial shoot with this lens was done under very bad conditions and I down-rated this lens. I have since shot under better conditions and now really like I am changing my post. This lens performs very well for the cost and range that it covers. It also passed an inadvertent drop-test as I caught my camera strap on my chair and pulled the whole camera and lens off my desk onto a hard floor. It hit right on the lens cap but I can see no visual damage and it still works perfectly.

The lens is probably the best of the available wide to super zooms and is definitely a keeper.

Registered: October 2007
Posts: 82
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro AF review by lextalionis
Review Date: 6/24/2009 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $620.00| Rating: 9 

Pros: To a non-pro, this is the lens to have!
Cons: For the pro, stick with the "simple" basics.

I give this one a 9 across the board. Truly a all-in-wonder lens for the basic photographer. It will satisfy your needs if you travel and don't require pro DSLR shots but require compact size and lots of functionality.

This lens does exhibit minor IQ flaws at each end and doesn't perform as fast as higher class glass such as Canon's L series.

Here are some sample shots taken with a Canon 300D and Nikon D90:

Sample Hi-Res Photos with EXIF


Registered: March 2009
Posts: 6
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro AF review by logaandm
Review Date: 3/15/2009 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $680.00| Rating: 8 

Pros: Fairly sharp, very extensive focal length range, VC works well
Cons: Somewhat expensive, feels cheap

Most people probably want a superzoom and want to get the best one. For my style of photography the the Tamron 18-270VC comes out on top.

First: all super zooms are compromizes and do not match the quality of a shorter range zoom and not even close to primes. They make up for it by giving the user a wider range of possibilities when taking pictures without the need to carry a great deal of equipment and without switching lenses. They are very useful for just walking around on a sunny day. For low light, other lenses are generally better suited.

Comparing: Nikon 18-200, Canon 18-200, Sigma 18-200, Tamron 28-300VC (on full frame) with Tamron 18-270VC.

Sharpness: Nikon and Sigma were soft on the telephoto end. Canon was soft on wide end. Tamron was pretty good through the range to a little soft at 270mm. The Canon is notable for being very sharp at 200mm. 28-300 is sharp at the wide end, but soft at telephoto.

CA: Nikon and Canon clear winners here.

Contrast: Tamron and Sigma were better than Canon and Nikon but all were OK.

Bokeh: Tamron clear winner. Canon was jittery.

Focus: Canon very fast and accurate. Nikon good, Tamron good, Sigma a little awkward (on Canon body)

OS/VC/IS/VR: All work well. I think VC is best, but a little quirky.

Build: Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Tamron. The Tamron feels very cheap. The Nikon feels very well built. Tamron 28-300, focus was off and the lens telescopes when pointed down. Very annoying.

For sports, the Canon is the best choice because of the fast focus and very good telephoto. The Nikon and Sigma will disappoint because of the lack of sharpness. The Tamron is a little slow at focusing.

For me, because of the sharper wide angle and the good bokeh, I like the Tamron and can live with the cheap build. For telephoto I generally like to blur the background so the lack of sharpness in the corners is not much of an issue.

Tamron 28-300VC. Not as good overall as the 18-270, but does offer a super-zoom solution on full-frame.

Registered: December 2008
Posts: 14
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro AF review by Canon-Nikon-user
Review Date: 2/22/2009 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 8 

Pros: range , weight , optical-quality-as-superzoom.
Cons: slow-AF.

I have Canon EF-S18-200IS and Nikon AF-S18-200VR and this one got from my mom.

I did not like it cause it is slow on my XSI , it is fast or fast enough on my 50D though , I dont need a superzoom for a camera like 50D or 5D2 so I returned it.

Optically, this lens is sharper than both Canon and Nikon that I have compared to this lens.

But most of times shooting action , the Canon wins with much faster AF and much higher keeper rate.

I think this one is a bit shaper than my AF-S18-200Vr at tele end but the Nikon beats it at wide end.

The Nikon vignettes more than this one but this one shows more CA, maybe because my D300 automatically correct CA of the Nikon lenses but not Tammy.

Oh well, I returned the Canon version of this one but I kept the Nikon version for now, but I think I will keep the Nikkor over this since the VR is better than the VC.

Registered: January 2009
Posts: 3
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro AF review by cian
Review Date: 1/23/2009 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 9 

Pros: from 18 to 100mm very good sharpness,clearness,neatness.100-270 is better that Nikon 18-200 from 100 to 200
Cons: CA only at 270mm

from 18 to 100mm very good sharpness,clearness,neatness. From 100 to 270 is better that Nikon 18-200 from 100mm to 200mm. Very good the Tamron zoom for difficult and hard lens plan with VC

Registered: November 2007
Posts: 1
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro AF review by Action
Review Date: 1/8/2009 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $585.00| Rating: 6 

Pros: Excellent Range, decent quality particularly considering the range
Cons: Heavier than Nikon 18-200mm, slow focusing, particularly in low light

My typical lens use is a Nikon 16-85 VR (I love this lens) and a Nikon 70-300 VR on a D40, however for a trip I wanted to avoid carrying extra lenses.

The quality of construction is less than my typical lenses. It is not poorly constructed, but only a small step over the standard Nikon kit lens. The zoom is does not have a linear feel, but has heavier feel up to a detent ~100mm and then becomes quite a bit lighter in use. Lens creep is a problem when carrying with a strap so the lock is a necessity. Autofocus is slow when compared to my Nikon 16-85 lens. The manual focus is very, very light in use. In high movement, high light situations (like in a boat) in many instances the Tamron would not autofocus over 100mm at all with my D40 and the VC would often 'snap' visibly. In low light over 50mm the autofocus is very slow and often takes multiple tries to get a lock even with an SB-600. Autofocus over 200mm is noticeably slower at well over 1 second even in good light in less than high contrast situations. Maybe this would perform better with something other than a CAM-530 AF system.

Never having used the Nikon 18-200 VR lens much to develop a great comparison, the Tamron is a bit less than what I was searching for. While it may have greater reach than the Nikon equivalent, it is quite a bit heavier and appears in passing to have more issues with developing a moderately quick autofocus lock in comparision. I would say that the pictures were of high quality (sharper than my limited experience with the Nikon 18-200). I did miss a number of shots due to slow autofocus that I feel should have been available.

Overall I will probably hang onto this lens for the limited number of situations where one lens must cover all (the quality of shots when the AF works is good). However in low light, this lens is not an acceptable substitute for something shorter and faster. This lens is not a bad travel lens (although it is a bit heavy), but careful consideration must be taken for its use. AF is fairly slow at anything over 100mm which is the compromising experience with such a wide ranging zoom. Pictures are of good quality and build quality is acceptable but not at the Nikon 18-200 levels.
Dave Smart

Registered: November 2008
Posts: 1
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro AF review by Dave Smart
Review Date: 11/22/2008 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $592.00| Rating: 9 

Pros: 15x zoom range. Vibration Compensation.
Cons: Short manual focus adjustment. Not USM

I've only had the lens a couple of days but already love it.
I have a Canon 40D on which I've used a Canon 18-55 and a Canon 75-300 III USM.
The Tamron's vibration compensation works a treat. It takes about 1 second for the VC to be fully up and running.
Focusing is not USM but it's good and reasonably quiet.
Zooming is slightly stiff between 50-100 but no big deal.
Sample shots on


This document copyright © 2009-2015,, all rights reserved.