Test report: Tamron 70-300 F/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD
- Adrian Wirz
- Dec 20
- 6 min read
Tamron is the first third-party manufacturer to offer a lens for the Nikon Z mount. With its 300mm focal length, this lens is an attractive option for any landscape photographer, especially at a mere 545g. However, Tamron lenses haven't always been known for their exceptional quality. How do they compare today? Is it worth buying?
But let's rewind a good 12 years, to when I started with landscape photography. Back then, I mainly used two Tamron lenses: the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 G1 and the 70-200mm f/2.8 from the very first generation. Many of my photos on this website were taken with these two lenses. The 24-70mm went through four camera changes. From the Nikon D600 to the Nikon D750, both with 24MP, and then on to the Nikon D810 with 36MP, and finally to the Nikon D850 with 45MP. The "ancient" 70-200mm was used on the D600, D750, and for a while on the D810, before I replaced it with the latest lens model, the G2. Then, in 2019, all my equipment was stolen in the South of France, and I had to start all over again. I still remember when the Nikon D810 came out, with its then-astounding 36 megapixels. Everywhere you looked, people were discussing which lenses could still handle that many megapixels. One manufacturer in particular was under fire: Tamron. "...no way, these lenses are still good enough in terms of quality..." and similar sentiments could be found in various forums. Even back then, I thought it was nonsense. Why should a 24-70mm Nikon lens be able to do it and a Tamron lens couldn't? Eventually, the voices fell silent, and people turned their attention to other things. Like Photoshop. Adobe introduced its subscription model back then, and there was a huge outcry from the community, but you don't hear anything about that anymore. The Instagram generation knows nothing else. Personally, I'm still annoyed by Adobe's policies at the time. But that's a whole other story. It just illustrates how quickly certain topics are forgotten.
In spring 2023, the Tamron 70-300 with the Z-mount for Nikon cameras was released. It's the first third-party lens with this mount. I, and I'm sure many others, had to wait a long time for it. There's bound to be more to come. Of course, I read various reviews and watched some videos. But—and this is the crux of the matter—I get the feeling that many reviewers are just saying what the manufacturer wants to hear. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any more test lenses available. Plenty of others are waiting for them! But let's take a look at my modest lens collection. There's the 14-30mm f/4, the 24-70mm f/2.8, and the 24-200mm f/4-6.3, all Nikon Z-mount lenses, by necessity. And I almost forgot, there's also a Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2 lying around. For that, I need the FTZ adapter to attach the lens to my Z7. I figured that at some point, when the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 drops below the €2000 mark, I'll buy it. But...
I've decided (for now) against the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 and in favor of the Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 with 100mm more focal length. Of course, price and weight also play a role. The Nikon costs around CHF 2300 (around CHF 300 less during sales), and the Tamron costs CHF 625. The Nikon weighs 1440g, while the Tamron weighs 545g. Okay, some of you might be thinking... those are two completely different lenses! But that's not quite true.
Of course, price and weight are one thing, and image quality is another, and certainly the most important. And since I'm neither a Nikon nor a Tamron ambassador, I'll have to buy the lenses myself, whether I like it or not. But that way I can write about them freely and without bias.
At the end of July, I made a last-minute trip to the Grimsel Pass. Strong winds and later the infamous Grimsel serpent thwarted my plans. Two things struck me as negative, but I'll adapt and, based on past experience, be able to cope.
The lens doesn't have an AF/MF switch, which I miss, but in the meantime I've simply assigned this mode to a spare button. The second thing, and this bothers me a bit more, is the lack of a tripod collar. In the photo on the right, you can see how far the lens extends beyond the tripod. The whole camera wobbles. This means you always have to frame the shot slightly higher and check if it's correct. It's a bit fiddly. In windy conditions, the camera and lens offer a lot of surface area to catch, so a tripod collar would alleviate this somewhat by shifting the center of gravity slightly backward. It would also help reduce the wobbling.
The photo on the left shows the "Grimsel serpent," or rather, the wave of fog at Grimsel. The wind was blowing so hard that only by sheltering myself from the car and standing behind the tripod was it somewhat possible to take long exposures with a graduated neutral density filter and a neutral density filter. But now let's get to the thing that impressed me the most: the image quality. It's truly superb, and at first glance (and probably not even at second glance) you won't notice any difference compared to the Nikon 70-200 2.8.
I photographed this bison handheld with the Tamron lens at 300mm. Further down is the Waldhaus Sils, taken with the Nikkor lens at 200mm.
A colleague lent me her Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 during the Engadin Workshop in 2020. I was thrilled with the image sharpness back then, and I still am. But for the price of the Nikon 70-200mm today, I could buy three Tamron lenses and lunch at the Waldhaus Sils restaurant. Do you see a difference in image sharpness? The bison was photographed at 300mm, and knowing that image quality decreases with increasing focal length, it's all the more astonishing what the Tamron can do.
Which brings us to the question: what do I need? Certainly not a lens to show off. Not once, and I mean never, has a buyer of my photos asked me what lens was used. And I've sold quite a few. Surely a lens purchase should pay for itself somehow, right? Wouldn't that be nice! You're getting less and less for your photos these days. Sure, lenses have gotten cheaper over the years, but unfortunately, they can't keep up with the price drop in prints. Wouldn't that be nice? :-)
In summer, visibility is rarely perfect due to the humidity. Nevertheless, I wanted to see how the Tamron 70-300mm performed here. The distance from Böckterfluh to Bölchenfluh is a good 13km. Of course, that's nothing compared to the roughly 50km distance from Linde in the Emmental to the Schreckhorn.
There are so many viewpoints in the Basel region; I've discovered several new ones on my bike tours. Below is another photo of the Böckterfluh with a view towards Gelterkinden. This slope, where single-family homes now stand, used to be a bustling ski area in winter. I also took my first steps on skis there.
Conclusion: After several weeks of deliberation, I decided to invest 625 CHF in photography after all. I wasn't disappointed; the lens is capable of more than the specifications on the packaging suggest. For me, 100mm is worth more than the maximum aperture. If you're often in the mountains, you'll be glad for the extra 100mm of focal length. The only thing I'm missing is a tripod collar. That's the only major drawback for me as a tripod photographer. Thanks to Angela for the Amazon tip; I'll buy a suitable tripod collar in the next few days. This lens has also been available with a Sony mount for some time now, and even cheaper—you can have it for around 500 CHF.
Want to be notified as soon as a new blog post goes live? Subscribe to my newsletter or RSS feed. at the bottom of the footer.
