Reading mode: Light Dark

Tamron 90-300mm Ebay Find for Sony A99

Go to last post
StayClassy

StayClassy

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
296
Reaction score
142
Location
Queens, NY, US
Found this on Ebay; bought it for $150! No fungus, oil or visible damage. Listed as flawless. Does anyone have any experience using a 90-300mm Tamron on Sony Alpha cameras?

352875ff83b14a84a6b4200dfa9174e7.jpg

b66995b1ca6c4729a66815668599010e.jpg



d77ce693ec99475296f935f1b4c0a24f.jpg





Original UV Filter
Original UV Filter

df6a556425fd4b56aa097bf8240619b1.jpg



















--
When people ask me whether I'm a photographer, I tell them that I'm more of a time artist. After all, my art is my ability to freeze time and capture a moment forever.
 
ncsakany said:
ncsakany wrote:

I couldn't see any markings on it :-)
Click to expand...
Lmao I think that Tamron wasted some real estate space on the mid-section of the lens. That would have been a great place to put their logo in case you weren't sure it was a Tamron XD
 
Why are you choosing this over many other more common 75-300mm choices (Tamron, Sony, Minolta, Sigma) in this range?
 
That's a bit of an odd duck.

It took me a few more looks to see the huge Tamron logos are stickers someone put on the lens.

The lens isn't popping up in Dyxum's lens database, but doing some Googling a few people have found this same lens in Pentax and Nikon mounts for sale on eBay for pretty much the same price you bought yours for. Those individuals and their comrades weren't familiar with it either.
 
VirtualMirage said:
VirtualMirage wrote:

That's a bit of an odd duck.

It took me a few more looks to see the huge Tamron logos are stickers someone put on the lens.

The lens isn't popping up in Dyxum's lens database, but doing some Googling a few people have found this same lens in Pentax and Nikon mounts for sale on eBay for pretty much the same price you bought yours for. Those individuals and their comrades weren't familiar with it either.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
this 90-300mm seems to be a new one for me or did I use one? I need to check my old pics. For sure I have used the 28-300mm (samples in the link here: http://art4less.smugmug.com/Sony-A7...mron-28/4112267_sgqcf3#!i=239803972&k=v5VZ7Ph ) and the 100-300 which was surprisingly good (see sample pics below). I remembered also playing with MF Tamron 60-300mm.

cheers and have fun.





i-Sc3HF7V-O.jpg





i-H2KRBTk-O.jpg





--
Cheers, gil - San Jose, CA Cheap Lens, JPG and 100% Handholding Provocateur Like happiness, photography is often better created than pursued.
 
gil said:
gil wrote:

this 90-300mm seems to be a new one for me or did I use one? I need to check my old pics. For sure I have used the 28-300mm (samples in the link here: http://art4less.smugmug.com/Sony-A7...mron-28/4112267_sgqcf3#!i=239803972&k=v5VZ7Ph ) and the 100-300 which was surprisingly good (see sample pics below). I remembered also playing with MF Tamron 60-300mm.

cheers and have fun.

i-Sc3HF7V-O.jpg


i-H2KRBTk-O.jpg


--
Cheers, gil - San Jose, CA Cheap Lens, JPG and 100% Handholding Provocateur Like happiness, photography is often better created than pursued.
Click to expand...
Wow these shots are AMAZING! I am seriously pumped up now to get my hands on this lens... I was told that Tamron made very few of the 90-300's, and out of the ones they did make, most were Nikon mounts and this lens was decomissioned in 1994.

--
When people ask me whether I'm a photographer, I tell them that I'm more of a time artist. After all, my art is my ability to freeze time and capture a moment forever.
 
Just saw your post...I bought the other one, though yours does look cooler. I like the lens alot so far. Fringe is very light or non existant. Check out my pics...not the best ,only had it out a couple of hours. (mine is brand new, from 1990)

Great buy and congrats its quite rare yours veeeeery rare ,..brian
 
brian14478 said:
brian14478 wrote:

Just saw your post...I bought the other one, though yours does look cooler. I like the lens alot so far. Fringe is very light or non existant. Check out my pics...not the best ,only had it out a couple of hours. (mine is brand new, from 1990)

Great buy and congrats its quite rare yours veeeeery rare ,..brian
Click to expand...
Thanks Brian, and wow, your pictures are tack sharp!
 
Last edited:
StayClassy said:
StayClassy wrote:

Found this on Ebay; bought it for $150! No fungus, oil or visible damage. Listed as flawless. Does anyone have any experience using a 90-300mm Tamron on Sony Alpha cameras?

352875ff83b14a84a6b4200dfa9174e7.jpg

b66995b1ca6c4729a66815668599010e.jpg



d77ce693ec99475296f935f1b4c0a24f.jpg



Original UV Filter
Original UV Filter

df6a556425fd4b56aa097bf8240619b1.jpg

--
When people ask me whether I'm a photographer, I tell them that I'm more of a time artist. After all, my art is my ability to freeze time and capture a moment forever.
Click to expand...
This lens usually sells for $30-60 on eBay, its an uncommon lens, but not a rare/desirable lens. I've used this lens and it is not a lens I would recommend to anyone unless the price was very low/it came in a lot with some better lenses you were after, for $75-150 you can get a modern version of the Tamron 70-300mm Di which will give you better performance. $175 gets you a brand new copy with warranty etc.
 
EarthQuake said:
EarthQuake wrote:
EarthQuake said:
StayClassy wrote:

Found this on Ebay; bought it for $150! No fungus, oil or visible damage. Listed as flawless. Does anyone have any experience using a 90-300mm Tamron on Sony Alpha cameras?

352875ff83b14a84a6b4200dfa9174e7.jpg

b66995b1ca6c4729a66815668599010e.jpg



d77ce693ec99475296f935f1b4c0a24f.jpg



Original UV Filter
Original UV Filter

df6a556425fd4b56aa097bf8240619b1.jpg

--
When people ask me whether I'm a photographer, I tell them that I'm more of a time artist. After all, my art is my ability to freeze time and capture a moment forever.
Click to expand...
This lens usually sells for $30-60 on eBay, its an uncommon lens, but not a rare/desirable lens. I've used this lens and it is not a lens I would recommend to anyone unless the price was very low/it came in a lot with some better lenses you were after, for $75-150 you can get a modern version of the Tamron 70-300mm Di which will give you better performance. $175 gets you a brand new copy with warranty etc.
Click to expand...
Were there any issues with sharpness from your use? I already bought it but I'm just curious if the IQ on the 70-300 is superior. Also with this being an uncommon lens, is there any chance of this being more of a collector's item?




--
When people ask me whether I'm a photographer, I tell them that I'm more of a time artist. After all, my art is my ability to freeze time and capture a moment forever.
 
StayClassy said:
StayClassy wrote:
StayClassy said:
EarthQuake wrote:
StayClassy said:
StayClassy wrote:

Found this on Ebay; bought it for $150! No fungus, oil or visible damage. Listed as flawless. Does anyone have any experience using a 90-300mm Tamron on Sony Alpha cameras?

352875ff83b14a84a6b4200dfa9174e7.jpg

b66995b1ca6c4729a66815668599010e.jpg



d77ce693ec99475296f935f1b4c0a24f.jpg



Original UV Filter
Original UV Filter

df6a556425fd4b56aa097bf8240619b1.jpg

--
When people ask me whether I'm a photographer, I tell them that I'm more of a time artist. After all, my art is my ability to freeze time and capture a moment forever.
Click to expand...
This lens usually sells for $30-60 on eBay, its an uncommon lens, but not a rare/desirable lens. I've used this lens and it is not a lens I would recommend to anyone unless the price was very low/it came in a lot with some better lenses you were after, for $75-150 you can get a modern version of the Tamron 70-300mm Di which will give you better performance. $175 gets you a brand new copy with warranty etc.
Click to expand...
Were there any issues with sharpness from your use? I already bought it but I'm just curious if the IQ on the 70-300 is superior. Also with this being an uncommon lens, is there any chance of this being more of a collector's item?

--
When people ask me whether I'm a photographer, I tell them that I'm more of a time artist. After all, my art is my ability to freeze time and capture a moment forever.
Click to expand...
I didn't test the optical qualities in any scientific way, I remember the general build, handling and focus speed to be rather poor(as you would expect from an early a mount consumer lens). I purchased it with a lot to get something else(don't remember what now) and quickly resold it.


Its an uncommon lens, but not what would generally be a lens that is considered to have collectable value, unlike say a Minolta 100/2.0, which sells near $1000 while similar lenses in the Canon system sell for about $3-400. There area a few reasons the Minolta 100/2 sells for so much, A. Its rare. B. Its an excellent lens. C. Its a lens that hasn't been updated in the alpha system and there is no real alternative from 3rd parties for this FL/Aperture setting. The same basic principal applies to the Minolta 35/2. as well.


This lens may be uncommon/rare, but it fails on the other points, not being a particularity good lens, and having many, many choices of better lenses in the system commonly available from Sony, Minolta and 3rd parties, so its unlikely to hold any sort of collectable value, unless you find some person who is really nutty about early Tamron lenses...
 
Thought i would add a couple more for reference....The only negative i find with the lens is a little pf in some cases, not bad but i personally hate it even in small amounts here and there.

Focus is actually quite fast,possibly with cameras back when it wasnt so fast,..it is with my a55 and very accurate.
I quick downsized these, the one of a nieghbor i asked to get a pic..wanted to check real life sharpness open at 4.5. Our dog is an edited crop and just a fun pic. The squirell is a straight re-sized j-peg no edit at all just re-sized....brian

5913a9b04ba64ab9bac168720b196c94.jpg



bdf36202739948e6826459b42ce07c02.jpg

f9a7a2454d214998bdaee1825507a6da.jpg
 
OntarioJohn said:
OntarioJohn wrote:
OntarioJohn said:
StayClassy wrote:
Thanks Brian, and wow, your pictures are tack sharp.

--
Click to expand...
Tacks are only sharp if you step on them. I've a bunch of them here and they are not really sharp. Razor blades are sharp, and my old straight razor's sharp if I strop it.

As far as sharp is concerned, I had a red blazer in 1964, and man was that sharp. No collar on the thing at all. With a white 3 pointed fake thing in the pocket, and a white carnation, I can remember all those girls on the other side of the gym saying, "That guy is sharp."

Why do people actually say TACK sharp anyway? It does seem really an odd expression. I wonder what the people on here who speak other languages think of it?

Son photo est un clou a tete affûter. Which is going to be darn perplexing, for it comes off in an odd fashion for sure.

au lit...bientot.
Click to expand...
 
brian14478 said:
brian14478 wrote:

Thought i would add a couple more for reference....The only negative i find with the lens is a little pf in some cases, not bad but i personally hate it even in small amounts here and there.

Focus is actually quite fast,possibly with cameras back when it wasnt so fast,..it is with my a55 and very accurate.
I quick downsized these, the one of a nieghbor i asked to get a pic..wanted to check real life sharpness open at 4.5. Our dog is an edited crop and just a fun pic. The squirell is a straight re-sized j-peg no edit at all just re-sized....brian

5913a9b04ba64ab9bac168720b196c94.jpg

bdf36202739948e6826459b42ce07c02.jpg

f9a7a2454d214998bdaee1825507a6da.jpg
Click to expand...
Thank you for these, they look pretty good actually, not as soft as I thought. If anything, I'll see how sharp my copy is and if Micro-Adjust can do something for it :)

--
When people ask me whether I'm a photographer, I tell them that I'm more of a time artist. After all, my art is my ability to freeze time and capture a moment forever.
 
For the same price or less, you could get the Big Beercan 75-300 Minolta. Way better build-quality (heavy though) and its a sharp lens.
 
Hi.

Sorry to burst a bubble, but Having worked at trade shows with Tamron and other camera and lens manufacturers, this really is something that Tamron would not do.

They would not simply use cheaply made stickers like that on a lens they were showcasing.

Also, Don't you think a sticker like that would have faded and the white "creamed" by now? Even if it was stored unused packaged. (The lens in your photo is clearly not "unused".) Even the Plastic "Tamron" on the lens cap has creamed!

It's clearly been put on by a third party to try and jazz up their (not so good) lens.




Just my opinion on the matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top