My 18-300 short experience (on an XT5) and my overall Good impression so far!

Yannis1976

Veteran Member
Messages
7,819
Solutions
2
Reaction score
10,245
Location
GR
Hi all,

I recently bought this one to test it (with the option to return within 14d) mainly inspired by some great photographers I follow in flickr who were also using it. I was also positively motivated having used the FF 28-200 which is a fantastic lens for FF.

Here are the positives:

- for anyone who doesn't pixelpeep, IQ is fine. If you show the photos in phones, or digital panels (up to A4), IQ will be sufficient.

- build quality is very good

- Sharpness at 300mm is surprisingly good although not better than the 70-300.

- having just one lens for such a huge range is extremely convenient

- bokeh at 300mm is good

- sunrays at f22 are good

And here are the negatives:

- Sharpness while pixel peeping/zooming is suffering especially at 18mm (!). I am not yet 100% sure, but some preliminary results show that the lens at 18mm is softer than my 16-80 and 10-18 no matter the aperture.

- AF can be hunting some times, but not very often

- The 70-300 focuses slight;y closer at 300mm, meaning is still more useful for bugs/insects/butterflies etc.

- Lens is definitely softer than the FF 28-200 (not surprising)

- OIS is not that good and you certainly need to use a bit faster shutter speeds vs the 70-300 for static subjects

- ISO can climb quite easily (but difference is not huge with the 70-300)

And here are some photos, all sharpened either with DXO Pure RAW 4 or Topaz Photo AI v3.

Overall, despite its shortcomings, I believe its certainly a better proposition than the outdated18-135 and can be an interesting and cheaper but sharper alternative to the 70-300...



d44d99aed6594821a3e9a93191f61dc1.jpg



5d91cff7802c483a9876d12c70316eb2.jpg



789de94f5070412bb0e04512082e71c8.jpg



And here is the same photo taken with the A7C and 28-200. Maybe a bit over-sharpened but also better processed in terms of highlights
And here is the same photo taken with the A7C and 28-200. Maybe a bit over-sharpened but also better processed in terms of highlights



e53ec8991c8b444d81c5efca6f8d53a5.jpg



Same photo and exactly same pp with the 70-300. Slightly but noticeably sharper than the 18-300 (although the 18-300 is also acceptably sharp at 300mm)
Same photo and exactly same pp with the 70-300. Slightly but noticeably sharper than the 18-300 (although the 18-300 is also acceptably sharp at 300mm)



And same photo with A7C and 28-200, pp in the same way, but upscaled in Topaz.
And same photo with A7C and 28-200, pp in the same way, but upscaled in Topaz.



If you don't zoom in the edges, picture s fine :-)
If you don't zoom in the edges, picture s fine :-)



878060963f4e47d5b0c210ec5bef8342.jpg



239ca445477f4fdfa7c98a1d5dd3c2ab.jpg



Same photo but with slightly different pp and the 70-300.
Same photo but with slightly different pp and the 70-300.



That is the last one!
That is the last one!





--
Yannis
 
Great set, Yannis. And glad to see you're enjoying it. I think the super close focusing distance is also a plus.

--
Randy
 
Last edited:
Congrats on getting the 18-300 finally!

This is a really useful post with excellent lens comparisons. I could compare my XF70-300 for some time alongside the Tamron 18-300, and your observations matched my own.

I also owned the 16-80, which was a vibrant, colorful lens. Ultimately, I loved the 16mm focal length so much that I went for the XF16 1.4 and consolidated my zooms down to just the Tamron.

Initially, I had some issues on my X-E3 using this lens, as sometimes the OIS wouldn't quite work well through the EVF and was jumpy. A momentary power cycle would solve it. I've updated the firmware, and mostly use it on the X-T2, but sometimes on my X-E3 and it seems this is mostly resolved. The 70-300 had a more stable view, but I find with the Tamron I can still pull off slow shutter shots if needed.

There are just so many creative possibilities with this massive focal length, always at the ready. I always loved bridge cameras (Lumix FZ-series), and I still kind of want an RX10 IV for fun one day. But practically, I know for myself the Tamron 18-300 on APS-C provides a superior 'bridge experience,' in part because of the sensor but also because the manual zoom action is more immediate than zoom-by-wire for certain types of shooting and pre-framing.

If I moved to full-frame, I might choose Nikon just to have the new NIKKOR Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR which weights only a 100gr more.

Looking forward to seeing more of your photos with the Tamron!
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
 
Hi Yannis

I bought the lens at its launch.

Somme comments : I find at 18mm a fantastic sharpness in the center while borders are a bit siotSame sharpness at 300mm than my 70-300mm again with a bit of softnes on borders.

OIS is the weak point at 300mm with at best 3 Stops.

The overal IQ is very good for such a do everything lens, definitly much better than the old 18-135mm

Woprks vetter on the XH2s than on the XH2

DXO PR3 delivers greatly improved results

Comparing results at 300mm with the 150-600mm shows of course ahuge difference in IQ for birds if light is not brilliant.The contrast being rather low.

A close to perfect do everything lens.
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
There’s some examples in this thread, Morris.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67694987
Thank you,

Only one and it's not a great example.

Morris
 
I would like to have that 28-200mm Tamron on my X-S20.
Yes it’s a fantastic lens but only designed for FF…
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
I generally take the XF 150-600 or 70-300 for birding, but here are a couple of birds shot with the Tamron18-300 at 300mm on the spur of the moment, because they appeared unexpectedly when I was travelling and had that lens on my camera.

The heron was taken with an X-H2S. The pileated woodpecker with an X-T5.

Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.
Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.



Pileated  woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
There’s some examples in this thread, Morris.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67694987
Thank you,

Only one and it's not a great example.

Morris
OK, sorry about that. Here's some all the way at the 300mm stop. These are processed jpegs and some have a sizable crop.



76d30cb6abd24507a02c4f53b591e65b.jpg



cf0cf042250b45b894cbbab8bff33d99.jpg



47949ee1fc5c4739a1c256254b193ef7.jpg



983be85e11444d339150fc8107a35c80.jpg



97d2e45dbafc4a00bf1b629f9edeb223.jpg



74e11d512a034a97b1e8d3f25382a47c.jpg



c5a6687a79eb4d92afe4aa5ce3b0afe4.jpg



bd0f16366bcb4de59ecbbb9f231775b9.jpg



52aad2c5d23f4044acd575afeaf97f49.jpg







--
Randy
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
I generally take the XF 150-600 or 70-300 for birding, but here are a couple of birds shot with the Tamron18-300 at 300mm on the spur of the moment, because they appeared unexpectedly when I was travelling and had that lens on my camera.

The heron was taken with an X-H2S. The pileated woodpecker with an X-T5.

Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.
Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.

Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
How do you feel about these compared to what you get with the 70-300?

Morris
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
I generally take the XF 150-600 or 70-300 for birding, but here are a couple of birds shot with the Tamron18-300 at 300mm on the spur of the moment, because they appeared unexpectedly when I was travelling and had that lens on my camera.

The heron was taken with an X-H2S. The pileated woodpecker with an X-T5.

Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.
Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.

Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
How do you feel about these compared to what you get with the 70-300?

Morris
It’s hard to compare because I use them very differently. The Tamron is my go-to travel lens because its range allows me to get unexpected shots like these when the opportunity arises, but I don't really use it as a birding lens. I use the XF 70-300 primarily for birding when I don’t want to carry the 150-600, and most often with a 1.4 TC, as a lightweight 100-400.

In terms of IQ, I’d say the Fuji may be slightly sharper across their common range, but not so much that you’d be able to tell without comparing side-by-side. They are very close at 300mm. The Fuji is slightly lighter, brighter, has better OIS, and focuses a little faster even with the TC.
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
I generally take the XF 150-600 or 70-300 for birding, but here are a couple of birds shot with the Tamron18-300 at 300mm on the spur of the moment, because they appeared unexpectedly when I was travelling and had that lens on my camera.

The heron was taken with an X-H2S. The pileated woodpecker with an X-T5.

Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.
Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.

Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
How do you feel about these compared to what you get with the 70-300?

Morris
It’s hard to compare because I use them very differently. The Tamron is my go-to travel lens because its range allows me to get unexpected shots like these when the opportunity arises, but I don't really use it as a birding lens. I use the XF 70-300 primarily for birding when I don’t want to carry the 150-600, and most often with a 1.4 TC, as a lightweight 100-400.

In terms of IQ, I’d say the Fuji may be slightly sharper across their common range, but not so much that you’d be able to tell without comparing side-by-side. They are very close at 300mm. The Fuji is slightly lighter, brighter, has better OIS, and focuses a little faster even with the TC.
I would say that my 70-300 is noticeably sharper and also lighter. However with the available software today you can correct some of the softness and the weight disadvantage of the 18-300 is compensated by the huge focal range. I would position the 18-300 as the new, better 18-135 that Fuji never updated…

--
Yannis
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
I generally take the XF 150-600 or 70-300 for birding, but here are a couple of birds shot with the Tamron18-300 at 300mm on the spur of the moment, because they appeared unexpectedly when I was travelling and had that lens on my camera.

The heron was taken with an X-H2S. The pileated woodpecker with an X-T5.

Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.
Heron from roadside in Schoodic Point Maine.

Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
Pileated woodpecker in park at St. Andrews, NB.
How do you feel about these compared to what you get with the 70-300?

Morris
It’s hard to compare because I use them very differently. The Tamron is my go-to travel lens because its range allows me to get unexpected shots like these when the opportunity arises, but I don't really use it as a birding lens. I use the XF 70-300 primarily for birding when I don’t want to carry the 150-600, and most often with a 1.4 TC, as a lightweight 100-400.

In terms of IQ, I’d say the Fuji may be slightly sharper across their common range, but not so much that you’d be able to tell without comparing side-by-side. They are very close at 300mm. The Fuji is slightly lighter, brighter, has better OIS, and focuses a little faster even with the TC.
I would say that my 70-300 is noticeably sharper and also lighter. However with the available software today you can correct some of the softness and the weight disadvantage of the 18-300 is compensated by the huge focal range. I would position the 18-300 as the new, better 18-135 that Fuji never updated…
I had sold my 18-135 a couple of years before acquiring the 70-300. My photos taken with the 18-135 look better than what I've seen posted with the 18-300 yet I don't have a direct comparison.

Morris
 
Hi Yannis

The versatility of the Tamron 18-300 is the dealbreaker for me,

I had the XF 18-135 a very nice lens, the Tamron has it flaws - once you know how to handle these it allows to make nice captures with ideal settings on the X-T2 and now on the X-T5, see two samples



X-T2
X-T2

This one got a nominee by Nat Geo in Holland



X-T5
X-T5

Both images jpeg sooc just cropped (not even highest MP)

Cheers, enjoy capturing the beautiful moments

Hans Pellicaan
 
These look good Yannis. How do images of things at 300mm and further away look?

Morris
Hi Morris! Do you mean landscape or birds photography? I will need to check, maybe tomorrow…
It doesn't matter. I just want to see what it does at 300mm and not close.

Morris
Hi Morris,

here are two examples of 18-300 and 70-300. All edited in DXO PR4:



Tamron 18-300
Tamron 18-300



Fuji 70-300
Fuji 70-300



--
Yannis
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top