Best Value Lens out There
When looking for a telephoto lens, I was expecting to spend $1000-$2000 to get something decent. However, when I saw this for $450, I thought I should at least try it out, and I’m glad I did.Having tried the infamous Sony 70-200mm f2.8 GM, this by no means is the same, but it’s 80% of the lens, at less than 25% of the cost. I do wish the aperture could get to at best 4.0 on the wide side, but for this price, I can’t complain. It’s light, feels well-built, and pretty sharp.Autofocus is great and snappy. and rarely found shots that missed focus, even when compared to my brand new Sony 20-70mm f4.0 G lens. Overall a phenomenal lens that I’d highly recommend picking up if you’re looking for a telephoto lens.

One of my FAVS!
This is one of my go to lens for wild life and outdoor daylight sports! I pair this with my Sony A7C and I love it! The 70-300 is great to get that extra reach with a reasonable price! Sharp images, feels great, solid pictures 10/10 !

Can the Tamron 70-300 RXD compete with Sony 100-400 at 20% the cost?
It’s hard to fault the excellent Sony 100-400 but I’m at times reluctant to take a 3 lb. lens on the road or hike long back country treks with it. I’ve been seeking a lighter long tele zoom option and think I may have found a surprise winner, the Tamron 70-300 f4.5-6.3. At first I did not consider it because conventional wisdom tells us to NEVER consider any long glass without Image Stabilization (IS). I’m a longtime pro and am used to shooting major sporting events with the best long glass including 300 f2.8, 400 f2.8, 500f 4, etc. Thus, I’m picky for only the sharpest telephotos yet switched to Sony to lighten the load. (See photo of its tiny size compared with Sony and Sigma lenses.) Let’s talk about this surprising Tamron’s pros and cons:The Tamron 70-180 is the first non-Nikon, Canon or Sony lens I’ve ever used in a 30 year career and have been blown away by it. The missing IS has been little concern since it’s easy to handle and is a constant f2.8, allowing higher shutter speeds in low light. It’s easy for a pro to at first dismiss the new under $500 Tamron 70-300 but it is indeed truly sharp unless you pixel peep the corners. For long glass, corner sharpness is of less concern for many of us although that would be a deal killer in a wide angle lens.Before taking a flyer on this Tamron, I first auditioned the Sony 70-350, fully intending to be happy with the compromise of having to use it in APS-C mode, yielding files of 26.2MP on my A7R4 that normally outputs 61MP. The copy I received wasn’t as sharp as I’d hoped. Of course, it is truly hard to compete with the rockin’ yet $2,500 Sony 100-400. I’d heard good things about the 70-350 with its quick linear motor, etc., that I probably expected too much and was a bit underwhelmed upon first testing it.Since I love my Tamron 70-180 I thought I’d give this full frame Tamron a dark-horse try at joining my stable of a dozen lenses, mostly Sony’s except for the 70-180, the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and the also stellar Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro. Bottom line: This 70-300 Tamron is darned impressive and uber sharp! I’m going to learn to work around its one key disadvantage of no Image Stabilization.Why own both the 100-400 and this Tamron? Simply said: Weight. The Sony is a well-balanced and manageable three pounds. Yet, the Tamron is a light lil’ baby at a mere 19 ounces and 20% the cost! If I choose APS-C mode this lens gives me 105-450mm reach, and is still sharp. At the long end, the Sony allows max f5.6 while this Tamron shoots 1/3 stop slower at 6.3.It focuses fast yet is no f-stop speed demon and even with the A7R4 in-body IS stabilization, in early use I am getting more perfect keepers at 1/500 than I do at 1/320 or 1/250. If light becomes an issue, my Tamron 70-180 shoots as long as 270mm at f2.8 in APS-C. I’m happily keeping the hard-to-fault Sony 100-400 but this Tamron 70-300 delivers truly impressive pro-worthy images, too, if you don’t mind upping ISO slightly when lighting conditions get a bit more challenging.

Excelente custo/benefício, mas a lente não tem foco automático rápido como uma lente Sony

Switched from an EF mount Sigma 100-400mm lens, and find this is so much more versatile and has slightly better image quality. Focus is a little bit faster & more accurate, but the main benefit is size and weight. IQ is a bit sharper and more pleasing, too, and it seems to auto-expose better on my Sony cameras. I don’t really miss the extra 100mm to be honest.Pros:- light, small – easy to carry around or have in the camera bag- good IQ, even without considering price- works very well with the Sony body, including in-body stabilizationCons:- plastic- no zoom lock means it often extends when carried barrel-down- “slow” lens (narrow aperture) but completely expected given price point & weightHighly recommended for a backyard birdwatcher or casual photographer looking to get a little reach in their photos.(If you’re curious about the birds, that’s an Anna’s hummingbird and a goldfinch that I think was either very lazy, overfed, or young. There was a female nearby working hard while he watched, and he wasn’t a great flier).