I recently had the opportunity to travel to the picturesque Mediterranean region for about one and a half months starting in the middle of January. My route began in Paris, the City of Light, and proceeded in turn to Marseilles, Nice, San Remo, Turin, finally returning back to Paris via Nice and Annecy. I brought a great deal of equipment with me, fortunately including Tamron's AF18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC. It covers an extraordinary 15X focal length range, a 35mm-equivalent 27-405mm! When I saw the zoom lens for the first time, I was taken aback by its amazing coverage. Yet, the lens was much lighter than I had expected. It weighs a mere 19.4 ounces or 550g. I wanted to travel light, so I chose the Tamron zoom lens and Nikon D90.

While still familiarizing myself with this exciting new lens I tried to use the Tamron 18-270mm for taking pictures from my hotel room in Marseilles. Based on my previous experience, I knew that extended range zoom lenses had inherent drawbacks in resolution performance, particularly at the wide-angle settings. Frankly, I did not expect too much from a 15X zoom lens in terms of contrast and overall image quality. However, when I checked the images by examining them at high magnification after capture, I was pleasantly surprised by its performance. Sharpness and contrast were quite good. Fine details such as the masts of distant sailboats are faithfully reproduced as you see (picture left). Then I zoomed in on the ferryboat at anchor in the center of the first scene. At the 270mm telephoto (that is, 405mm when converted to the 35mm format) I could clearly discern the faces of people coming ashore from the boat. Since the depth of field was shallow at that setting, the depth of the portion that could be captured with perfect sharpness was inevitably shallow, but the Tamron's ability to resolve fine detail was much higher than I had expected. It occurred to me that that the two LD glass elements, three hybrid aspherical elements, and one AD glass element used in its construction were certainly put to good use! In short, my opinion after the first trial test was "up to standard." I was delighted to be able to travel with the Tamron AF18-270mm.

I used the Tamron 18-270mm for taking pictures at different angles of view and at various focal lengths in Nice as well. I found the differences in expressions at wide-angle and telephoto settings quite interesting. I discovered another thing in the course of my extended shooting experience. In most cases, the 200mm setting (that is the 35mm equivalent of 300mm) is more than sufficient for street photography. This implies that at the 270mm (the 35mm equivalent of 405mm), the optical power is too strong and may be difficult to use for street scenes. However, this is not really a problem. The "extra" 70mm range at the long end (from 200mm to 270mm) should be considered as "insurance" that can come in handy. To put it differently, the focal length range from 28mm to 200mm is sufficient for general shooting, but you will occasionally encounter scenes requiring a little more zoom power. The full range of this lens really comes into its own in such cases. I say it's like insurance because it helps in a pinch. However, things are different in landscape or nature photography. Here, the focal length range from 200mm to 270mm is used quite often. This is because the typical size of the field you wish to capture is usually different for streets and mountainous areas.

To make efficient use of a high-power zoom lens, you should place special importance on the focal length range from 18mm to 100mm. This concept applies to any long-range zoon, not just the 18-270mm zoom lens. The underlying reason for this is that the amount of change in the angle of view becomes greater as the focal lengths become shorter. Therefore, it is important to select focal lengths carefully when you take pictures in the range from wide-angle to standard settings. As you can clearly see by examining the pictures shown here as examples, the main subject is the same but the visual impressions created are entirely different at 18mm, 27mm and 55mm settings. For example, it is evident that the 18mm setting is ideal for capturing the station in context; 27mm is adequate for emphasizing the train; while 55mm is probably best for conveying the feeling of the station. Before you take the shot, you have to ask yourself what impression you wish to convey to the viewer, because that answers your question. You don't need to feel pressed even if you are unable to derive an answer immediately on the scene. Just take pictures at different focal lengths and select later. That's one effective way to take good pictures, and a good argument for choosing a long-range zoom. I took pictures in different angles of view at different focal lengths in Nice too. Differences in expressions at wide-angle and telephoto settings are interesting. I found one thing in the course of capturing. In most case, 200mm that is the 35mm equivalent of 300mm is sufficient out on the street. This means that at the 270mm or the 35mm equivalent of 405mm setting, the power is too strong and difficult to use for street scenes. However, this is not a problem. The 70mm focal length range from 200mm to 270mm should be considered as insurance for rare cases. To put it differently, the focal length range from 28mm to 200mm is enough for most cases, but you will encounter scenes requiring little more zoom power. The extra 70mm focal length range wields its power in such cases. It's like insurance since it helps in a pinch. However, things are different in landscape or nature photography. The focal length range from 200mm to 270mm is used quite often. This is because the field sizes are different on streets and mountainous areas.

Vol. 2