IQ, Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 vs Tamron AF 28-200mm f/3.8 - f/5.6 XR ?

If you can afford it you should definitely go with the 28-300mm. It has a faster min aperture, and you'll get more out of it.

Though I have some advice for you...don't settle. Just don't buy a lens until you can afford a truly good one, meaning one from your camera company. You'll end up spending way more if you get a lens that costs less until you get a good one. It's better to simply borrow a lens, or, if that can't be done, wait with what you have.

Trust me, everything is better with actual mfg. lenses. There is absolutely no comparison between the Tamron, Sigma, and Vivitar lenses I've used with my Nikkor lenses. The difference is that big.

The Tamron 28-300mm has a Nikon motorised version which will functionality completely on the D3000. the situation nonetheless is with undemanding with maximum of those superzooms, is that's a extensive compromise. in many circumstances image high quality is extraordinarily undesirable, with in basic terms one lens that has shown itself. this is a Canon lens, the 28-300mm f3.5-5.6L (and that's predecessor the 35-350mm L) that's outfitted to the very maximum standards, with the suitable substances. presently Nikon supplies an 18-200mm and a newly released 28-300mm the two a variety of lenses come on the element of the Canon L-sequence' customary, something different than the 4 lenses i've got reported, you may desire to be careful approximately procuring a huge zoom, particularly that's greater effective to adhere to primes or small zooms, then swap to the suitable lens.