Image quality of Tamron 16–300mm vs Nikon 18–55mm and 55–300mm lenses

Question

I have a Nikon D5100 with the Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18–55mm f/3.5–5.6G VR and Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 55–300mm f/4.5–5.6G ED VR lenses. I find the sharpness of the 55–300mm lens is significantly better, so use that whenever possible.

I am considering purchasing a Tamron 16–300mm lens. Can I expect the image quality in the Tamron at the 55–300 range to be at least as good as my current 55–300 lens? And can I expect the image quality of the Tamron in the 18–55 range to be better than my current 18–55 lens?

Answer 1

After reading various reviews, you've probably noticed that the general consensus is:

• Super-zoom lenses compromise on image quality for increased Zoom Range. They typically have reduced Max Aperture, Sharpness, and Contrast. They typically have increased Chromatic Aberration and Lens Distortion.

• OEM lenses provide better image quality than third party lenses.

Based on this, the Tamron 16-300mm is at a disadvantage because it is a third-party lens with a greater zoom range. Although each lens should be considered for its own merits, reviews of super zooms are all the same.

The _____ has good center sharpness for the class. However, the impressive zoom range comes at the cost of some noticeable softening and chromatic aberration, especially in the corners and at the long telephoto range. For this type of lens, distortion is mild at the wide and telephoto ends... ^{_{(Not a real review. For illustration only.)}}

So it's helpful to visually compare test shots to decide for yourself whether a lens is good enough for you:

• Tamron 16-300mm vs Nikon 18-55mm
• Tamron 16-300mm vs Nikon 55-300mm