Opinions on Tamron 17-50 f/2.8

Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
904
Location
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Looking towards getting this lens, have a wedding coming up (not mine and I am not the photog) that I would like to have a fast zoom lens for. I have my primes and they will be used as well (mainly 35mm and 50mm) but seeing as I am lacking on the wide, I figured this would be a good lens to have.

Any opinions on this lens? I am sure I will have to fight to get a copy that is acceptably sharp wide open and without focus issues but I'm not against that, I can test the lenses at the store with no problems.

Thanks in advance for all opinions.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
408
Location
The Frozen Tundra...aka south of the Twin Cities,
Looking towards getting this lens, have a wedding coming up (not mine and I am not the photog) that I would like to have a fast zoom lens for. I have my primes and they will be used as well (mainly 35mm and 50mm) but seeing as I am lacking on the wide, I figured this would be a good lens to have.

Any opinions on this lens? I am sure I will have to fight to get a copy that is acceptably sharp wide open and without focus issues but I'm not against that, I can test the lenses at the store with no problems.

Thanks in advance for all opinions.
From all the research I recently did (just bought the Sigma 24-60 f/2.8) The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 got very high marks for sharpness. You might want to check the Photozone review for some in depth testing. It's not an AF-S lens so it might be a little noisier than some would like, but for the price it seems like a real performer.

Here is the Photozone review
Tamron
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1750_28_nikon/index.htm

The site has also reviewed the Nikkor 17-55 and Sigma 18-50 for reference.


Good luck!
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Messages
884
Location
NC
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
131
Location
Midwest, USA
When I bought the nikon 17-55 I thought that I would
sell the tamron but I found that I am keeping it on my
D70 for use with family and friends as a light weight kit.
 
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
131
Location
Midwest, USA
These are cicadas with the tamron 17-50.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
131
Location
Midwest, USA
Very nice.

Anyone having any issues with flash exposure in TTL-BL mode and this lens? I'll be using an SB-600 mainly and this lens will see use outdoors as well as indoors.
I did have some trouble but I think it was user error.

The speedlight instructions do say that you should
be 10-12 ft from your subject (even when bouncing).

If you are closer than that you may
need to make some adjustments.

When following the directions I actually had
better relsults with TTL-BL than just TTL.

I also was getting more blown highlights with
the 17-50 than my 18-135 on a sunny day.

This may have been user error also the bright
sky in the background is not real easy to shoot.

Many of the problems people complain about are
probably user error but who would like to admit that.

Sure it's not the 17-55 but it would
not be very reallistic to expect that.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Messages
966
Location
Nottingham, UK
I find the Tamron overexposes compared to my other lenses, which is a bit strange, so I set -0.3EV when shooting with it. Some poorly calibrated models sometimes even overexpose by a whole stop, so you may need to get it calibrated by Tamron.

In comparison to the 17-55, I've yet to see one so if Keith is willing to do one I would be very interested! From what I've seen it's pretty close in terms of sharpness but the bokeh is rougher.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Messages
966
Location
Nottingham, UK
Definatly, a much better lens than the already good 18-70DX. Infact I find mine focuses faster than the 18-70DX even though it lacks AF-S, as it only takes 3 turns of the AF screw to go from 30cm to infinity, and it's f/2.8 so more light for the AF sensor.
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2006
Messages
490
Location
Belgium
I am a big fan of that lens. Pictures are sharp even at 2.8, it is small, light, cheap...
AF is not really an issue in practice.
Highly recommended
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2006
Messages
1,136
Location
La Jolla, CA
Terrific lens

Here's a me-too with a couple of totally unscientific, hand-held, real-world pics to back it up. Both are straight out of the D200 with camera sharpening +1, contrast and saturation normal.

Points of light:
Inside Our Lady of the Angels cathedral, L.A.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

17mm@2.8

My salad the other day, f/2.8 vs f/4
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Above at 50% of original size (750k). It's definitely a little sharper and contrastier at f/4, but some of that is just depth-of-field. It's more than adequate wide open.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
904
Location
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Ok, I think the concensus is pretty clear thus far.

Methinks I'll be seeing those peeps at the camera store soon...

Thanks for all the posts, it has helped greatly.

Anyone else with thoughts, please chime in as well.
 
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
131
Location
Midwest, USA
Here is nothing fancy. Full image resized and 100% crop of
the center only. The corners are not so great to compare.

Tamron
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Nikon
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Tamron
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Nikon
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
2,222
Location
Orlando, Florida
Well guys and gals, if you were going on an Alaskan cruise would you replace the 18-70 with this lens? Opinions one and all appreciated.

Thanks
Nancy
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
386
Location
B&H Web Site, Lens Section
Here is nothing fancy.
Well, Keith -- you say "nothing fancy" but those crops speak volumes about the color, contrast, resolution and sharpness of the Nikkor by comparison. That's why it costs the big bucks. The Tammy (and likewise the new Sigma 18-50) is a very good lens capable of producing all the IQ most people need for the majority of uses but when you must have the best image quality, nothing beats the pro level Nikkors. Thanks for posting those.

Phil
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom