1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Tamron 17-50 2.8

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by tech1961, Apr 4, 2007.

  1. tech1961


    Jan 28, 2007
    Houston Tx.
    I would love to know how good this lens is. I need a good low light lens without breaking the bank. Does anyone have any opinions or samples? Thanks in advance. Jimmy
  2. ja6ke


    Dec 28, 2006
    U.S. D.C. area
    I also would like to find out more about this lens. I do know that sam stern (wedding guy) over on dpreview raves about it. Search on his name (if you can ever find a time when search is working) and you should find some information.
  3. tomtodeath


    Jan 11, 2007
    new jersey
  4. gugs


    Feb 24, 2006
    I am a big fan of that lens. I was intending to buy the Nikkor 17-55 (I was prepared to spend that money), went to the shop, and thanks to the advice of a colleague on FM (Nikt), I did a comparison between the Nikkor, the Tamron and my 50mm 1.8@2.8. In fact I could not see a difference in the pictures (non scientific testing based on pics outside the shop). Since I was going to use that lens occasionally, I decided to go for the Tamron, at a quarter of the price of the Nikkor. The Tamron is optically on par with the Nikkor. The Nikkor has a few advantages: fantastic build quality and slightly faster AF with built in motor (AF-S). On the other hand, the compactness and light weight of the Tamron are a big advantage to me.
    You can have a look at the reviews on www.photozone.de to get more scientific data about those lenses.
    Here are a few simple shots I posted some time ago:
    and my short review on my website:

    Hope this helps
  5. AirTimid


    Feb 17, 2006
    Nova Scotia
    I just got this lens the other day and I really like it so far. It's sharper than my 18-70 kit lens. It may just be me, but I think the Tamron produces warmer colors than my Nikon, I guess you could say "punchier". Focus is noisier, but seems just a accurate as the Nikon. I did notice issues with my SB80dx Flash. It was overexposing everything. I cleaned the contacts on the mount and everything seems pretty good now. I'm very happy with my purchase.

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

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

    Not the greatest images, but I haven't had a chance to out with the lens yet. Sharpening is set to high in-camera and i'm using a custom curve on my D1X. All other settings are "normal". Raw converted to Jpeg via CaptureNX.
  6. weiran


    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    This is a lens I'm very interested in and might buy once I'm in Japan. There is some sample variation in this as they don't all come out of the same factory, so make sure you can try out a number of samples before you buy.
  7. I have the 17-50 Tamron and like it. I did have to return my copy because it front focused, it was only noticeable at 2.8 and is just fine now.
    These were all shot at f11 on a D100. The color, contrast and detail produced with this lens , IMHO, is fantastic. I haven't compared it to the Nikkor 17-55.

    Best Regards


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

    View attachment 88472

    View attachment 88473

    View attachment 88474
  8. tech1961


    Jan 28, 2007
    Houston Tx.
    Thanks for all the great info and pictures. There is part of me saying go for it and another saying save up for the nikon. I have enough cash for the tamron right now and it may be a while before I can justify the nikon. I drive myself crazy with these lenses. Thanks again.
  9. Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2017
  10. weiran


    Jan 2, 2007
    Nottingham, UK
    I don't think you'll regret getting the Tamron Jimmy, the Nikkor is better but not 4 times better!
  11. RB, These are beautiful shots. I hope I can do as well with my copy of the Tammy 17-50 when the weather finally co-operates in Ohio.
  12. Thank you Tom, I hope you enjoy your 17-50 Tammy as I do mine.
  13. dlee79


    Sep 2, 2006
    Los Angeles, CA
    It is a great lens.... if you get a good sample that doesn't front focus.

    I used to have one that used to front focus... eventually sold it and got a 17-55mm.
  14. Hi Jimmy!

    I have had mine about a week and so far I´m very happy with it. I bought it to replace Nikkor 18-70 and I´ll say the same as Elroy about it being sharper.
    I haven´t noticed any problems with it, exept low-light (indoors) it sometimes hesitates a bit before locking the focus...

    Here´s some snaps during the one week ownership (with D200):

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
  15. love it

    i did a lengthy search before getting mine. i couldn't be happier.
    and like somebody said, the nikon is probably better....but CERTAINLY NOT 4 times better.
    Sam Sterns raves are dead on.

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.