Tamron 18-200mm or 28-300mm??

[daisbuys]

As above guys, I think I would like to change my 18-200mm tamron lens for a 28-300mm?

Does anyone recommend this exchange?

I now have a wide angle lens, so dont really need the lower end of the 18mm, but would like the high focal range of the 300mm compared to my 200mm.

I am just concerned if I will be losing out in quality over quantity on the higher lens?

Has anyone owned the 2, or tried out the 28-300mm. And what are their thoughts on them?

Cheers all.

Dave

[T0MAT01]

The usual benefit of these superzoom lenses is that they negate the need to swap lenses as they have all focal lengths covered.
If you don't mind changing lenses then you would probably be better off buying something like a 70-300 for the (expected) improved image quality if you need that focal length.

Not knowing what other lenses you have makes it difficult to comment, but if you were just using one of the superzooms on it's own I would think the 18mm - 28mm range would probably be more useful to me than the extra 100mm at the long end, but that's me... it kinda depends on what you like to take photos of.

[daisbuys]

Thanks for your reply.

I am taking picks of anything and everything at the moment, fav being landscapes and cars.

My other lens is a Sigma 10-20mm if that helps?

[Just call me Al]

Avoid the 28-300 lenses unless you like soft photos. I had one as my first lens & it was terrible. The Sigma 18-200IS is a good buy & the 70-300 is a much better option if you want further reach, especially if you buy the Nikon/Canon with VR/IS

[daisbuys]

The reason I am thinking of this is that I can px my current lens for this one for an extra £50. Although it is used, I think it is still a good price?
So do you think it is worth that trade?

[Just call me Al]

Originally Posted by daisbuys

The reason I am thinking of this is that I can px my current lens for this one for an extra £50. Although it is used, I think it is still a good price?
So do you think it is worth that trade?

After my experience, I wouldn't even pay £50-00, without trade for one. The tele end is very soft. There are better people on this site that will recommend you a lens but just avoid the 28-300. Jack of all trades, master of none. I'm sure one day they will make a good one but it's not now. If you can cover the wide end then you would be far better to go for a Sigma 70-300 APO (if money is an issue). What camera do you have & what budget do you have if you sold the 18-200?

[T0MAT01]

Originally Posted by daisbuys

I am taking picks of anything and everything at the moment, fav being landscapes and cars.

In that case, the shorter focal lengths should be of more use to you than the longer. I'd stick with the 18-200 if it were me.
You only have 2mm of overlap with your 10-20 which isn't worth worrying about and on the longer end the difference between 200mm and 300mm never looks as much as it sounds - 300mm is roughly the equivalent of cropping 1/4 off of the longest edge of a 200mm shot.

Is there something specific that you want 300mm for or is it just a 'grass is always greener' kind of thing?

[daisbuys]

Camera is a Nikon D40X.

I am not in a rush for this lens, it's just that I found a web site through Pixalo which part exchanges lenses, cameras etc etc and found this 300mm tammy on it at a good price.

I only want the higher focal end just in case I spot some cool wildlife when taking landscape pics, and to get as far in as possible without diturbing them. And also thinking that the 300 would probably be better than my 200 tammy? grass/greener in other words lol.