View Full Version : Lens for Nikon

29-12-2010, 7:21pm

I have a Nikon D90 and I am looking at getting a Tamron 17-50mm lens but I am so confused by all the different letters in the names. AF, SP, IF, LD then there's aspherical??? I have no idea which one I'm supposed to get and can't find anything online that explains more about lenses in a comprehendible way for beginners. I would really appreciate your thoughts, advice, links etc.


29-12-2010, 7:45pm
great lens :th3:

perfectly matched to the D90 I reckon.

forget all the associated nomenclature, all you need to do is ask for opinions regarding the lens in question.. that's why we're here.

Note tho, if you can afford the price(approx 3x the price) of the Nikon 17-55/2.8, then this is the better lens in the long term
If you simply want great value for money and a more manageable size/weight form, the Tammy is the better option.

Note they also make a VC variant too. This is the stabilised(VR in Nikon speak) type.. and could also be handy to have(even for a wide angle lens stabilisation is handy to have). More expensive.. but not by much.

29-12-2010, 7:55pm
All those letters are referred to as nomenclature. Each lens manufacturer uses them. Tamron's Australian distributor list the Tamron ones (with a description) here (http://www.maxwell.com.au/tamron/nomenclature.html)

29-12-2010, 7:57pm
Thanks, VC was the one thing I did understand in the titles hehehe.
As much as I would love the Nikon brand it just isn't feasible at the moment but I hear the Tamron is very good as well.
I just didn't want to order the wrong one with or without the other letters. :)

29-12-2010, 8:08pm
There are good and bad lenses in every brand's line-up. Also lenses are not the same. You and I could buy the same lens and the results can be different. One lens could front or back focus, where the other one is spot on. Lenses are built to a standard within a 'tolerance' factor. So even buying a top of the range lens does not necessarily mean you will get a good copy, but certainly some lenses rate much higher than others in the results stakes.

29-12-2010, 9:01pm
Also note that Sigma has updated it's old 18-50/2.8 to a 17-50/2.8 with stabilisation as well. A newer lens design and reputedly either as good as, or better. Have yet to see any direct comparisons.. but I'm sure once you've used the Tammy, you'll be more than happy with the images, even at f/2.8 across the board.

actually! I have to edit my reply, even before I finished it!
Just checked PhotoZone, and they do have a direct comparison between the Tammy and the Sigma lenses, and it seems that the Sigma is slightly better in all IQ terms(to be expected). Sharpness is better, but the biggest advantage of the Sigma is in the bokeh quality it produces(blur in the out of focus areas).
one aspect of the tammy I've never been happy with was always the bokeh(and hence one of the reasons I choose to use the Tammy 28-75/2.8 lens in preference for many images where overall image quality is important(not just sharpness). Sigma looks to be better in that respect than the Tammy... but otherwise pretty close to each other.

29-12-2010, 9:30pm
Thanks for the link Ricktas, makes a bit more sense now I know what they stand for.

30-12-2010, 8:19pm
I looked at the Tammy for a D7000, auto-focus was slower than the Nikon 18-105vr.

30-12-2010, 8:25pm
If your going 3rd party I think sigma hsm lenses are the way to go right now