Tamron announced a new 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD full frame lens (Model A010) for Nikon DSLR cameras

Tamron 28-300mm F:3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD full frame lens (Model A010) for DSLR cameras
Tamron announced a new 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD full frame lens (Model A010) for Nikon DSLR cameras. The lens is priced at $849 compared to $1,047 for the similar Nikkor version. Additional information:

Product Highlights

  • State-of-the-art optical design technology delivers superior image quality.
    The advanced optical construction of this lens includes four elements of LD (Low Dispersion) glass, three Molded-Glass Aspherical elements, one Hybrid Aspherical element, one XR (Extra Refractive Index) glass element, and one element of UXR (Ultra-Extra Refractive Index) glass, which has greater refractive index than XR. The full use of specialized glass elements in its design contributes to making this outstanding lens as compact and lightweight as possible, while minimizing aberrations, resulting in superior image quality. Particularly impressive is the thorough compensation of chromatic aberrations at the telephoto end, yielding images of enhanced clarity and crispness.
  • Focus on portability - The lens is now even smaller and lighter.
    In addition to state-of-the-art optical design that facilitates downsizing of the lens body, the mechanical design leads to a smaller overall lens compared to the existing Tamron 28-300mm (Model A20). The incorporation of a highly sophisticated multi-stack-cam layout that takes up far less space as well as the PZD (Piezo Drive) AF, an autofocus drive system with a simpler, more compact structure, make it possible to reduce the overall dimensions of this lens. These technologies are the fruit of Tamron’s more than 20 years of research and development in the high-power zoom lens field.
  • Advanced anti-reflection coating.
    The application of BBAR (Broad-Band Anti-Reflection) coatings for suppressing reflections on lens element surfaces minimizes unwanted flare and ghosting to deliver sharp, crisp, high-contrast images.
  • Upgraded cosmetic design – Elegant tungsten silver brand ring.
    Tamron has upgraded the cosmetic design and finish of this lens to create a more sophisticated, high-end look in keeping with the demands of discerning full-frame DSLR users. Employing a sophisticated linear pattern rubber grip on the zoom and focus rings and an elegant tungsten silver brand ring, this newly designed model accentuates its visceral presence with understated elegance and class.
  • PZD (Piezo Drive) delivers faster, quieter autofocus action.
    The PZD (Piezo Drive), a standing-wave ultrasonic motor system, delivers faster, quieter, more precise action when the autofocus is engaged. The full-time manual focus system is easy and intuitive, enabling quick and convenient manual focus at any time.
  • Sharper images with VC (Vibration Compensation)
    Tamron’s acclaimed VC (Vibration Compensation) mechanism reduces image blur caused by camera shake to deliver significantly sharper images even when shooting handheld.
  • Circular diaphragm facilitates achieving spectacular blur effects
    Using a circular diaphragm4 , this lens achieves spectacular background blur effects that enable creative use of depth of field.
  • Moisture-resistant construction for worry-free outdoor shooting.
    Moisture-resistant construction helps prevent moisture from penetrating the lens.
  • Price: $849


Model A010
Focal Length 28-300mm
Maximum Aperture F/3.5-6.3
Angle of view (diagonal) 75°23’ - 8°15’ (for full-frame format)
52°58’ - 5°20’ (for APS-C format)
Lens Construction 19 elements in 15 groups
Minimum Focus Distance 19.3 in (0.49m)
Maximum Magnification Ratio 1:3.5 (at f=300mm: MFD 19.3in)
Filter Size Ø67mm
Maximum Diameter Ø74.4mm
Length 6 3.8in (96mm)
Weight 19oz (540g)
No. of Diaphragm Blades 7 (circular diaphragm)
Minimum Aperture F/22-40
Standard Accessories Flower-shaped Lens hood
Compatible Mounts Canon, Nikon, Sony
This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Guest

    all we need is another SUPERZOOM

    • more

      for 200 more, one can get tamron 600mm….

    • FDF

      But this one’s got an elegant tungsten silver brand ring.

    • El Aura

      You might not need another superzoom but Tamron might ‘need’ a slice of the superzoom market to maintain or increase their sales and profits.

    • genowordprocessor

      It’s obvious that you have much to learn about optics.

      • Lorenzaccio

        or not

  • Nikon User

    Piece of junk! So disappointed about Tamron this time.

    • Sam

      So disappointed about almost all the new lens this year!

      • Duncan Dimanche

        are you serious ?!!!! sigma new 50mm 1.4 just to name one !!
        Sam you seem like a very sad photographer if you cannot find what you need/want with all the options out there…

        • yep

          sigma 24-105 is very good too

  • rt-photography

    40 versions and they still all suck

    • AM I Am

      41 means something else in some other places.
      Look up The dance of the Forty-One.

      • rt-photography

        Screw the dance im talking lenses.

  • yoyo

    Perfect match with my D4s!

    • sdancer

      Channeling Rockwell?

    • sdancer

      Channeling Rockwell?

      • Zograf

        Sense of humor? – he’s been sarcastic.

        • Steve Griffin

          Yes the sensor of humour he is.

          • lorenzaccio

            sensor humour lol

  • Archer

    Pretty ambitious price tag compared to the Nikkor. especially considering at f/5,6 the Nikkor is even a tiny bit faster.

    • Will

      This will appeal to Canon users like myself, this would be a hell of a landscape lens and the Canon 28-300 is way too bulky and expensive

      • experting

        bulky = good glass = typically better results

  • marokero

    From the commentary so far it seems manufacturers are only supposed to make expensive f/1.4 primes or >$2000 zoom lenses. Shame on Tamron for offering more affordable choices.

    • rt-photography

      Affordable for a pos ultrazoom? If it was $700 then yes. Mot for this garbage. And btw u can buy a simple 50 1.4 thats quite cheap. Or even the 1.8.

      • saywhatuwill

        You make it sound like the lens was $1000 or more. After seeing your post I went and saw it was $850. So that leads me to believe that you’d say that it was too expensive if it was $700 and that it should be $550. If it was $550 then it should be $200. There’s just no winning.

        • rt-photography

          not at all.when it was rumored the price tag was a grand. not more or less. then it was announced, it said $900 (above which has been changed). the lens should cost $700. Im not asking more or less, that is the price it should sell for. that is a fair price. not cheap but not expensive. I didnt say $550 but when nikons cost $1050 I wouldnt buy the tamron. resale would hold better with the nikon.

    • UnknownTransit

      Way to expensive for a superzoom. I’ll rather buy the nikon version for a bit more unless it’s those outstanding Sigma lenses.

  • Ms.KrystalMeth

    Roll, Roll out the Barrel Distortion! What is a Tamron? Hey Tam…Get a Clue from Sigma..they started to make quality lenses.

    • Outisider

      Compared to the 18-270 the new 16-300 is ridiculously better you should try it before you judge it, thus this this lens, though not perfect could be better than we think

    • Lucky13

      Sigma did not ‘start’ to make quality lenses. They had plenty before their new ‘Global Vision’ stuff.

      • rt-photography

        no they didnt. they offered lenses that are as quality as the price tag. you get what you pay for. most of their 2.8 zooms are very low contrast when shot wide open and af accuracy is a problem and I wouldnt say they are the most durable gear and camera compatibility issues. if you want good (not excellent) gear for a fairly reasonable price then sigma can give that. its not a bad thing or a good thing, but this is fact. I started with sigma 2.8 gear. then got my first nikon and realized what I was missing.

        their new art lenses show they CAN deliver elite gear but never wanted to. till now.

        • Dpablo unfiltered

          Except for their macros. And lenses like their old 180 f2.8 and their 100-300 f4. And some of their old wide angle primes. And some of their real long lenses…

          • rt-photography

            their 15mm fisheye is good. but considering they make tons of lenses and only a few really stand out, thats a pretty bad good to bad ratio.im happy to see them finally waking up after selling millions of copies of garbage for so many years.

          • does sigma good? well ofc, yes

            is it true that 100-300 f4 is sharper than 120-300? I was considering it as an alternative to sigma 400 5.6 apo telemacro (1:3 1.6m) I have in order

        • UnknownTransit

          the 70-300mm 2.8 sigma is decent for it’s price, much better than those consumer tele from nikon but the better options are more expensive.

          You probably notice that more $$$ buys you better gear until the art sigma arrived.

          • rt-photography

            More money USUALLY buys better gear. we can argue worth of value for paying so much more though. not everything nikon make is worth the money.

            the 85 1.8g vs 1.4g the 50 1.8 vs 1.4g the 58 1.4g is the ripoff of the century. so is the 17-35AFS. $1800 for a 10 year old lens. nice.

            Im pissed at sigma they took so long to wake but Im happy theyve finally done it and are on a road to delivering really exquisite gear. puts pressure on nikon. I couldnt be happier.

            btw, what 70-300 2.8 are you talking about?
            you must either be talking about the 120-300 or the 70-200. my problem with sigma is the lack of contrast and sharpness wide open. I had the 70-200 MkII and it sucked donkey shlong. then bought the 80-200 AFS and realized all my sigma 2.8 glass was garbage.

  • Ultra-extra. Hahah, I think that says it all.

  • sdancer

    Come on, so close Tamron… refresh the 28-75 already! You can do it!

  • sdancer

    Come on, so close Tamron… refresh the 28-75 already! You can do it!

  • desmo

    It needs to be 24-300 and priced at $600,
    OTW pay the extra $200 for the Nikon

  • Kynikos

    What is somebody with an FX camera doing with a 10x superzoom anyway?

    If your application calls for a 10x superzoom, you should almost certainly be shooting DX and you can max out lightweight convenience while you’re doing it.

    • Bob

      So…if you already have a full frame camera but want a superzoom for those times when you’re trying to avoid changing lenses or bringing a lot of stuff (eg. vacation), you should buy another camera and lens rather than just a lens?
      I’m not arguing the wisdom of your question. I just don’t understand what difference any answer would make.

      • Kynikos

        Actually, yeah.
        If packing light is the issue, buy a v1 (j3, whatever) and 30-110 kit for $300 and you’ve got a plane ticket left over (or add to the 10-30, or the ft-1 and a 55-300, or whatever… spend your own dough eh?). Or a D3200. Or a micro 4/3 setup, or…

        Yes a person can buy this lens and put it on FX. It will capture images. I’m not arguing the validity of that assertion, Son, I just don’t understand why anyone would.

        • Bob

          Your original post suggested an APSC camera as an alternative, not a small mirrorless. Personally, I wouldn’t own a mirrorless camera but I could see that as a viable replacement for folks who like ’em. A D3200, in my mind, isn’t enough of a difference in weight/size to justify the extra cost. Someone (I forgot who) said if they were going to shoot with an APSC sensor camera, it needed to be mirrorless since they wanted a bigger payoff in size and weight for the compromise in sensor size.
          I don’t understand why people do a lot of things that they do but that’s okay…
          BTW, I have a father who died a long time ago (I’m pretty old) and a heavenly father; you’re not one of them.

    • RxGus

      I guess I should sell my Nikon 28-300, because I have a FX camera and Kynikos thinks I am dumb…

      I have other lenses. I don’t make money on my photography. I often don’t want to carry more than 2 lenses because that just gets annoying while on vacation, or on walks in the park, or on dates, or…

      My standard travel bag:

      It is sensible and works well for what I want/need. Go snob somewhere else.

  • Ren Kockwell

    Shame it’s not a DX 18-300 zoom, we desperately need one of those

    • yes

      nikon has one. google it

  • doge

    Finally a lens we were all asking for. Thanks for listening Tamron. Take a lesson Nikon. Listen to your user base.

    • mikeswitz

      Who exactly is “we all”? But thanks for speaking for “them”!

    • Zograf

      ?? What lesson – zoom in, Nikon has such offering for more than two year now. I wonder who would choose this one to Nikon’s offering for $200 price difference…

  • Guest

    Hope Tamron could do a remake of the old 24-135 f/3.5-5.6 which was a great walk around lens and bang for the buck.

  • Global

    I’m glad that Tamron made this.

    Its not like Nikon’s version is so amazing or anything.

    $200 bucks is a LOT to the D600 entry FX users.

    And all-in-one zooms are wonderful toys to have. The best photo is the photo that you take — and are ABLE to take. All-in-one zooms for walking about and travel will never go out of fashion.

    • Dpablo unfiltered

      Two hundred bucks isn’t much on a thousand dollars but that’s alright. That is the suggested retail price. It will probably wind up being about half the price of the Nikon. But it is a bad lens for someone to try to imitate because the real one doesn’t have much separating it from better zooms. Not like the 24-85 that came out at the same time…

  • King of Swaziland

    For only $850 you too can turn your full frame camera into a compact, and take crappy photos…

    • Are you a technician or a photographer?

      Some of my favourite images were made with the slightly heavier, slightly faster Nikkor 28-300.



      • King of Swaziland

        But couldn’t a compact camera do the same thing, for less money and less space in your bag?

        • I don’t know of any compacts that wouldn’t have been noise and DR limited at ISO 1600. Both of those examples had pretty high dynamic range.

          Besides that, I already have an FX sensor – why leave it at home?

      • TeaBreak

        Being a photographer does not exclude being interested in getting visually appealing results of one s photo subjects. Unfortunately your tree example shows the whole bunch of shortcomings a lens could have. Lot s of ugly CA, distorsion, weak micro contrast and low optical sharpness. Though it|s a nice shot it would be far better with a good lens.

        • mikeswitz

          Couldn’t all that “ugly CA” be removed with one click in LR?

          • waiting for f2/2.3wider 24-70+

            CA can be removed in LR yes, but you lose resolution/sharpness every time you have to fix a photo of CA, distortion or other things. It’s best if the lens is inherently good; has low distortion, low CA, good sharpness. Sigma’s 24-105 looks to be one, but it isn’t very wide aperture. I’ll wait for f2 sigma/nikon lens and see if they can pull similiar performance as the 24-105

        • Patrick O’Connor

          You print that out, at a size suitable for the content, and you’ll never notice any of that.
          While convenient, viewing photos on any device isn’t nearly as flattering, or satisfying, as a real print.

        • I one-clicked the CA away, but I offer you this example as well. Tamron 18-270 junk.

          The image is not sharp anywhere, is full of noise and I love it.

          “Sharpness is a bourgeois concept”
          – Henri Cartier-Bresson


          Grain added and colours enhanced in Lightroom.

  • I liked my Nikon 28-300 when I had it (and may get another at some point). No, it’s not the 28-70, but it’s not meant to be; it’s an adequate walkaround lens for those times you don’t want to carry all your stuff. Aside from their macros, I haven’t tried a Tamron yet that I’ve liked, and I don’t have high hopes for this one either, especially not at that size or price.

  • Aldo

    I’ll wait for the 14-600mm f2-4 for 500 bucks

    • Mardock

      Ohhhh yeah, you mean that one from Solartronic. Yeah, turns out they decided not to build it. Market research told them to build a 10-1000 f/1.0 lens instead. Coming out next year at a “special” introductory price of $399.95.

  • Royl

    I have never felt the lure of a do-everything-lens, but if I did I would get one of those new Fuji “something”1000 zoom P&S. If I am going to wrestle with a huge honking lens on a huge honking camera, it will be a professional f2.8 zoom or a big old tele.

  • Pickle

    I suppose if one had all the good lenses already and wanted a superzoom to channel in the inner soccer mom from time to time, this wouldn’t be the most horrible choice.

  • Glen Cockwell

    The elegant tungsten ring is a game-changer for me. Tamron take my money now!

  • PeterO

    Wow. Four days until the supposed launch of the D810 and we’re sitting on a Tamron lens announcement. I guess we know everything there is to know about the D810. Kinda makes for a dull launch. Naturally the bashing phase will need to begin 🙂

    • We definitely need more leaks!

    • nothing to complain

      D810 will have auto-focus capabilities of d4 or d4s. There’s really nothing to bash. It will be better BIF shooter than current D800’s out there.

      • TeaBreak

        Keep on dreaming. This never will happen. Semi-pro AF accurancy IN PRACTICE always has fallen behind the pro model capabilities (despite same specs). Promising the opposite is an age-old story that has been proven false over decades. I remember they told us same story even at times of F5 / F100. Best AF performance you’ll get from the current flagship and nowhere else (D1 > D100 / D70, D2x > D200, D3 > D300 / D700, D4 > D800 / D 7100).

        • D800 AF SUCKS BALLS

          I must say that I’m dissapointed with the AF of my D800. I don’t know if it’s the lenses or camera, but the focus is either back or front instead of “center”. Maybe a auto-focus fine tune will help to solve it a little bit, but would I be better off with bying a used D700? I mean come on, here a body of D800 costs 2200 euro, and the body of 5d3 is 3000 euro. I mean yeah sure the price difference is alot, but I’d expect the nikon to have something COMPARABLE to the AF of 5d3, but that is simply not the case. I’m really dissapointed at how nikon has done the AF for their cameras (had D7000 before, was very unsatisfied).

  • Back to top