[HenriCartierShufflebottom]

This was (and is) an interesting topic for me.  I already have the Tamron 70-300mm VC but had thought it was DX only.  I purchased it after it bettered the well regarded Nikon 70-300mm in a couple of initial lens comparison reviews.  Later a review placed the Nikon higher but the supplied images in that review definitely showed the Tamron as top?  It is a moot point as both lens are fabulous for the money.  I find the Tamron lens stabilisation to be by and far the best!  Also when I got a Nikon D600 body I was pleased to find the Tamron was FX after all.

 

At the start there is some query around 70-300's and 70-200's tested at DXO on a Nikon D800.  You should note that DXO score 'fast' lenses rather highly so relatively a 70-200 f2.8 always seems a better lens than a 70-200mm f4.  In practice this is not the case  (unless you really need f2.8).  It is easier to design a better f4.

 

I do not for one second believe that the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 is twice as sharp as the 70-300mm at f8.  It is clearly nonsense.  A professional will need the f2.8 and after all does not pay for it as it is tax deductable and/or the customer (or employer) pays for it.  Why not have the more impressive faster lens?  Pretend professionals and wealthy amateurs also value looking good.

 

Bigboki, thanks for posting your photo's (above) clearly this is a great lens and I hope you enjoy yours like I do mine.