Which one is better, Tamron 16-300mm lens or Tamron 18-270?

A few options are recommended to you:

1. The most cost-effective 18-105VR. This lens is the D90 lens. It has good image quality, anti-shake, and is cheap. The workmanship is average and the telephoto is not too long.

2. The longest length is 18-200VR. This lens is the so-called "travel head". It shortens the wide angle and lengthens the distance to clearly present the scenery. It is definitely the best choice for taking in the world with one lens. . The disadvantages are that it is a bit expensive, the picture quality is a bit average, and the telephoto lens is a bit weak.

3. The best image quality is the 16-85VR. This head is well made and the lens structure uses sufficient materials. The 16mm wide angle can obviously bring a more shocking wide-angle scene effect than the 18mm starting lens, and the imaging at each focal length is It is even more unstoppable, a rare bull’s head among dogs! VRII anti-shake can withstand 4 shutter speeds. Highly recommended for those who pursue image quality, wide angle, and feel. Slightly more expensive and comparable to the 18-200, but has a shorter telephoto, but is sufficient.

Other such lenses include 18-70 and 18-135, both of which were kit-mounted and had good image quality but no anti-shake.

We also recommend the Tamron 18-270 super zoom lens from the subsidiary factory, which is also a high-zoom lens with outstanding cost performance. The magnification is much higher than Nikon's 18-200.

So it depends on what you are pursuing.