Jai issued a first very hard judgment on the Tamron 18-200 ... Tried on my three cases (D70, D50, D 5100), it had its limitations. Or the fact léquiper dun quality polarizing filter, and not of a single UV -which wasnt the case when I first evaluation-enables improved image quality quite significantly. Lachat for a few dozen additional EUR of a good filter attenuates some defects in the balance, contrast and color saturation. In addition, the Tamron is compatible with all the "real" SLR cameras (Nikon) he fact that has its own AF focusing motorization. As against the distortion, which is badly corrected, is very troublesome. While the Nikon Nikkor AF-S f / 3.5-5.6G IF ED VR II, usually 4 times more expensive, better off not nest in this area ... Yes, but the Nikon has no real competition, what that 'as some say, for the quality of its manufacture and its grip (it is heavy and very balanced), the overall picture sharpness it provides, its stabilization. Jen has, I can compare. Its selling price, still unreasonable, is another big flaw! 2) As for the Tamron, monitoring the quality of all of a lens series produced tens of thousands dexemplaires in several workshops Southeast Asia, knowing that its price is fired up, obviously a problem (performance consistency , reliability). To summarize, when we "fall" on a Tamron 18-200mm lens properly assembled, it is, with a good circular polarization, which significantly improves its results, a satisfactory alternative and not ruinous. In a corrigendum 1, I gave it 4 stars, a little generously. On reflection, these reserves make me go back to 3.
