03-12-2011, 02:00 PM
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1299934502' post='6690']
There is indeed not much difference regarding sharpness between the Tamron and the 70-300 VR. The Tamron has higher contrast, though, so the images can give an impression of better sharpness compared to the Nikkor.
Both are ok, but not outstanding towards the long end of their focal range. The Tamron is a bit larger, which might be an important difference for your purpose.
One alternative to the mentioned 180/2.8: Nikkor AF-S 105/2.8 VR with TC-17E II. Gives you two focal lengths to choose from, less brightness with the converter, though.
-- Markus
[/quote]
Thanks, Markus. I appreciate your suggestion of AF-S 105/2.8 VR with TC-17E II, which sounds very interesting. Indeed I like the AF-S 105/2.8 VR very much. So I will consider your suggestion seriously.
In any case, I would love to see a test of the AF-S 70-300 4.5-5.6 VR on a full-frame Nikon camera to appear on phtozone. I hope this will not be very long time.
Best,
Frank
There is indeed not much difference regarding sharpness between the Tamron and the 70-300 VR. The Tamron has higher contrast, though, so the images can give an impression of better sharpness compared to the Nikkor.
Both are ok, but not outstanding towards the long end of their focal range. The Tamron is a bit larger, which might be an important difference for your purpose.
One alternative to the mentioned 180/2.8: Nikkor AF-S 105/2.8 VR with TC-17E II. Gives you two focal lengths to choose from, less brightness with the converter, though.
-- Markus
[/quote]
Thanks, Markus. I appreciate your suggestion of AF-S 105/2.8 VR with TC-17E II, which sounds very interesting. Indeed I like the AF-S 105/2.8 VR very much. So I will consider your suggestion seriously.
In any case, I would love to see a test of the AF-S 70-300 4.5-5.6 VR on a full-frame Nikon camera to appear on phtozone. I hope this will not be very long time.
Best,
Frank