hard to compare two different lenses at different focal lengths as well!!
hard to compare two different lenses at different focal lengths as well!!
NIGH -KON
Just picked up a second hand Tamron 17-50 f2.8 (with focus motor but no VC). I'm excited to give it a work out but first impressions are good. Picture quality, as Tony said, leaves the Nikon kit zoom for dead (I know, its not apples with apples) but I see this as a definate upgrade for me.
The focus motor seems a little harsh and is slower than some of the high end Nikkor lenses I've had the pleasure to try out, but for the price I can not grumble. As soon as I've got a few daylight shots with it I'll stick them up and I might even stick up the same test shot from my now redundant Nikon kit lens as a comparison.
Nikon D5000 / 18mm-55mm / 55mm - 200mm / Tamron 17mm - 50mm / Manfrotto 190XPROB
I was semi-talked into this lens (non VC version) by my local shop for an upcoming wedding. Could not be happier. Sharp as can be. Noisy AF but I don't think it is slow. I think the noise just makes it sound slow, if that makes any sense.
Great lens IMO.
BTW I begged the bride and groom to get a professional photographer
cliffconnell.com.au
Flickr
Olympus E-M10 Mark II - Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO - Olympus 17mm f/1.8 - Canon 20D - Canon 18-55mm Kit lens - Canon 50mm f/1.8 - Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 - G10 - iPad - Macbook Pro - 27" iMac - Shortboards x 3 - MiniMal - Kids x 2
I have the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and it is a great lens, very sharp. So I would think this will be great.
I have the non VC (Vibration Compensation) version and love it.
I find it very sharp & it produces great bokeh.
A few people have questioned the sharpness at F2.8
Here are two (full res) jpgs I just shot, straight from camera*
(* Nikon D200: Sat +, Sharp +, Tone + (it's 'Custom Bank D' - my no processing/dead head mode))
Both taken bouncing the SB600 at 50mm F2.8 (ISO100, 1/60)
DSC_3509.JPG 3872x2592 3.75MB focus: eye
DSC_3510.JPG 3872x2592 3.09MB focus: nose
There are more (straight from camera) full res shots here taken with a Fuji S5 Pro using that same lens.
It may be a little short at the top end (50mm) but I'm very happy with it.
Michael
A really informative little review....well done, I like the sample images too, you seem to be getting right inside the eye of the cat, I had no idea there was so much detail in there
Richard
I've been wrong before!! Happy to have constructive criticism though.Gear used Canon 50D, 7D & 5DMkII plus expensive things hanging off their fronts and of course a "nifty fifty".
Although I'm not much of a tog, may I also add I can get bright, sharp pics straight from the camera, something I've never been able to do with 'kit' lenses. And at $300 (or $350, can't remember) for the original non VC model second hand, great value.
Have: Nikon D90; Tamron 17-50mm 2.8; Tokina 50-135mm 2.8; Tamron 18-270 'alphabet' lens; Nikkor 50mm 1.8; 1x Nikon SB-600; 3x Yongnuo YN560 flash, 1x Yongnuo YN465 flash.
Want: Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro;
You have some great pics there. I'm thinking about a 550d with this lens rather than the kit lens. Given the kit lens is only $80 or so - is it worth getting both?
Beaco if the kit lens is the same focal length, I wouldn't bother. Spend that 80 bucks on a good polariser.
A tip:the Tamron has a 72mm filter thread. Get yourself a 77mm filter and step down ring: that way, if you ever get pro glass with a 77mm filter thread, you'll be good to go. I made this mistake and on a later purchase, my current filter doesn't fit.
I decided to forget about the kit lens. Ordered this Tamron lens instead along with a Marumi 72mm DHG CPL filter. I guess if I get a pro lens I'l just need a new filter. Filter was only about $60 anyway so not too much of an issue.
Looking forward to testing out this setup when it arrives.
Purchased the non-VC copyof this lens about 6 months ago and I am very happy with it - a very sharp and useful lens. Spends about 50% of the time on my camera. Very happy with it. Bought it just before the VC was released in au and was cheap at the time.
Did read a review tht said the VC was a tad off as sharp as the non VC but that was oly one review. Have not missed the VC in use but I would think it would only improve this great lens.
Please be honest with your Critique of my images. I may not always agree, but I will not be offended - CC assists my learning and is always appreciate
https://mikeathome.smugmug.com/
Canon 5D3 - Gripped, EF 70-200 L IS 2.8 MkII, , 24-105 L 4 IS MkI, 580 EX II Speedlite, 2x 430 Ex II Speedlite
Beaco, just be mindful of the impact of a cheap filter. I gave filters away after some ordinary experiences with cheaper UV filters and now choose to always use the hood on my lens regardless - I do have a CP filter but I paid an embarrasing fee for it and it certainly wasn't on the cheap end of the market. I have since done a sacraficial destroying of my evil, evil cheap filters (not really - I gave them to a fellow who bought my kit lens). So, test with and without so as to ensure the filter is not giving a false impression of the quality of the lens as I can assure, this is a very sharp lens.
I think you will enjoy this lens.
The CPL filter in question seemed to get good reviews so I'm hoping it's ok.
Camera has arrived so I know what I'll be doing on the weekend. Yay!
Nice review maccaroneski.
I bought one of these today as a "Street Lens" to go with a 50D also bought today to replace the Oly E-30 I was disappointed with. So far with a limited number of shots due to dull late afternoon light I am very pleased. Have added a general test shot (HDR) taken @ ISO 200, 17mm, f/5.59. Black in top RH corner is part of verandah. This lens has great potential.
Canon G16
Canon 700D
Nikon D7000
Fujifilm X100T
Fujifilm HS10
Sony DSC-V1 680nm IR converted for infrared work |
grrr. Rainy and busy weekend meant not much photo taking. Camera and lens seem excellent so far though.
Hi,
thanks for the review and pictures , very nicely done.
l'm also considering this lens "Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di-II VC LD Aspherical (IF) Lenses " for my a wedding in 5 weeks time.
Do you or others have any test pictures at the 17mm side as well? as would be good to see that as well.
is this lens good for wedding photography and in the church, indoors, etc as well?
also fast enough to capture Great portraits shots with great Bohek as well?
was looking at this one or the sigma one or even the canon 17-40L f4 (but 1 stop difference). not sure, decisions .. decisions!? lol
thanks
Robert
Fantastic Lens on my 7D. Nice and sharp. I dropped the first one I bought (3 weeks old!) so I had to buy a second ($553 with a free UV 72mm filter) delivered to my door. It was the only thing I did not have on the list of extras. I have since sacked my insurance company (QBE) because they refused the claim and my new insurance policy does not require any list! Back to the lens, great for just about any situation where the bigger zooms are not required.
Thanks Greg for your response! Shame you dropped the first one , and being an accident the insurance company should honour your claim!? thats harsh mate! Tell them that's Un-Australian! haha
Can you please advise Where did you pick up this lens up for?
Saw on DWI for $474 > HERE
l'm looking at shooting my cousins Wedding in 5 weeks time, and would like a Great Portrait and low light shooting lens that compliments my current equipment list in sig.
by the way, what insurance company do you have now and whats the claim called?
as never really thought about it .. and l have over $10,000 dollars (easily) of Photographic gear as well. IS it expensive? l should get it as well hmmmm...
thanks mate.