If I wanted a decent photo in low light, I would not fool around with something like a 1.8 lens. The D3300, I think, has a flash on it. In dim light if you want a good photo, put some light of your own on it! If your somewhere you can go look at the lens you are considering, go look. A short lens becomes more portable, a plastic lens can be quite a bit lighter. If I had a camera with me just for taking trophy photo's, both those thing's appeal to me. Cost is another thing.
I haven't used a Tamron in years But the best lens I ever had was a very old Tamron 50-150 on a film camera. Tamron's 18-270 I'd take a look at. If it's short and light it only cost's $450 in the B&H catalog. An 18-200 is $199 in the same catalog. In comparison a Nikon 35 mm 1.8 is just under $600 in the same catalog. Certainly your not spending the cost of a D3300 and the lens you mentioned just to take a few trophy photo's. Unless you have the money, I'd look at the longer focal length lenses. A 35mm and 50mm lens isn't gonna give you much reach, certainly nothing like that 18-270 Tamron.I think you really should consider what else you'll use the camera for and buy a lens that is suitable for all of it.
