about | support
home
 

Search Used

Tamron 17-35mm f2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
44 192053 Oct 23, 2012
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $393.34
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.09
8.94
8.6
sp-af17-35

Specifications:
Tamron's 17-35mm DI features a maximum open aperture of F/2.8 at the 17mm setting, providing you with the advantage of shooting in dimly-lit conditions and helping to prevent camera shake that leads to blurred subjects. The fast f/2.8 aperture also contributes to a professional look with a beautifull blurred effect in the background : even at wide-angle where depth-of-field is commonly deeper.

Tamron's 17-35mm DI uses 3 aspherical elements , effectively minimizing various abberations. By using Hybrid Aspherical lens elements, the number of elements in this lens is reduced since even one aspherical element can compensate for the same abberations as it would take several spherical elements to do. The end result is both high image quality and compactness in this new wltra wide-angle zoom lens.

Tamron's 17-35mm DI features an LD (low dispertion) lens, which is made of special glass materials that have low dispertion indices to confine dispertion of spectra, a cause of chromatic abberations, to the absolute minimum, and provides sharp and clear images even at the corners.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3  next
          
sleepwalker33
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 663
Review Date: Jan 23, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $325.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: There is no better wide-angle option remotely near this price.
Cons:
No USM, nothing else that isn't advertised IE 2.8-4

Tamron lenses are really just the best bang for buck out there at the moment. I couldn't imagine parting with my lens and will probably keep it for a very, very long time. On my Canon 1d it is exteremly wide and sometimes I almost think it is to wide for general use, however this lens will always be in my bag it is just to darn useful. On a 1.6 crop I believe this lens would be close to perfect for general photography.

Go buy it, and if you are a student/educator you qualify for this lens at a mere 400$ brand new.

One final thing, Tamron offers a 6 year warranty on their lenses which is outstanding better then any other manufacturer.

This lens doesn't have USM but it isn't slow. I took her out for a party gig I shot two days ago and only missed one shot due to slow focus, not bad out of 130.


Jan 23, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sleepwalker33 to your Buddy List  
bircher
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 179
Review Date: Oct 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $469.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Price, lightweight, quality, fast aperture
Cons:
None

I have had this lens now for a couple of months and its a keeper. For under $500 dollars you get a lens that is fast (2.8 at its wide end) and lightweight and you get the same quality of a Canon "L" lens but without the pricetag. On top of all that you get a six year warranty (U.S. only). Go out and buy this lens.

Oct 5, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add bircher to your Buddy List  
SFishy
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 10, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 57
Review Date: Aug 28, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Great quality and sharp - love that it is f/2.8-4
Cons:
None I can think of

I really researched lenses these lenses (this one and the 28-75 f/2.8) before I bought them... and I can say I have been EXTREMELY happy with photo quality.

I don't use this lens much, but when I need the wider shot, it comes right out and serves up excellent quality photos. I love the fact that it's widest aperture is f/2.8-4! I only buy "fast glass" so this was a great affordable option in the wider range.

Right out of the box it performed marvelously on my 20D. I have no doubts that if I needed wider shots more often, it would be one of my favorite lenses. Tamron has served up a great set with this and it's 28-75.

Amy

Image taken with Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4

http://www.something-fishy.com/photography/albums/BeachColor/reeds_n_snow2_mod_gallery.sized.jpg



Aug 28, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add SFishy to your Buddy List  
Cliffee
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 13, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $429.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Price, size. EXCELLENT CUSTOMER SERVICE!!!
Cons:
Poor QA. Somewhat slow focus. Had to send back to Tamron twice to get problems resolved.

My first copy of this lense had major focus issues on my 20D. It just could not focus and give a sharp picture consistently. Sent it to Tamron, (NY) four weeks later recieved it back and still crappy. They said it was calibrated to factory specs. They paid for return shipment back to them. Their service manager told me his head tech will get a few lenses from the warehouse, compare them, calibrate/check the best one and send it to me. I guess they are aware of the QA also. After one week they UPS overnighted me another lense. This one is simply awsome. Very sharp and contrasty at all focal lengths and apertures. So sharp that I can't see any difference between f2.8 and f8 unless I look out towards the edge.
Although the first one left a bad taste in my mouth Tamron made it good and took care of me. Excellent customer service goes a long way! I would have rated this lense a 9 if it weren't for the aggrivation of a bad copy.
Now I can start enjoying this lense.


Aug 13, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Cliffee to your Buddy List  
jimdavies
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 5, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1557
Review Date: Jul 12, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Good fast apperture at the wide end (17mm-20mm). Very sharp at all appertures. Nice looking colours and contrast. More than half the price of the 17-40L
Cons:
None for the money. I like this lens a lot.

I've not owed an SLR for long. I decided a few months ago to take up photography and I have really enjoyed myself. My first lens was an excellent 18-125mm Sigma. Great lens but just too slow and I wanted some nice fast glass for taking shots in tricky lighting situations.

I liked this lens because the reviews are in the main very positive and it was half the price of the slower 17-40L.

Quality of results (from my so far limited use of this lens) has been excellent! Better than I thought.

I thought my Sigma lens was sharp until I saw my images from this. Colour and contrast are excellent. i took a few shots in bright sunlight and no fringing or flare only nice warm inviting images.

So far delighted with my purchase and I hope the 28-75 lives up to the same. (awaiting delivery)!


Jul 12, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add jimdavies to your Buddy List  
Simon S
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 20, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
Review Date: May 20, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Great feel in use. Smooth fast focusing. Sharp image
Cons:
Some CA 35mm wide open Filters are NOT cheap!

A great alternative to the pricey L Canon glass that is used as a benchmark to all Canon fit lenses.
Focus is fast ,though a bit noisy ,zoom has good feel with no creep whatsoever. 17mm gives good sharp images even at f2.8 ,but you need to take care when using full zoom. If you don't stop down to say f5.6 on a bright sunny day , there is a real threat of colour fringing (CA) around high contrast areas of the image.


May 20, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Simon S to your Buddy List  
DavidWEGS
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3799
Review Date: May 16, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $449.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Weight, price, build (surprisingly good) optical qulaity.
Cons:
A tiny bit softer than the 16-35/L (now are you really surprised there?) not a great fitting hood.

I've had this for a few weeks and shot about 3 weddings and many portraits with it. It is a solid performer, giving about 92% of the image quality of the Canon L in the same range. Focuses fast enough and accurarately. Feels quite good in the hand.

Very pleased for the $$.


May 16, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add DavidWEGS to your Buddy List  
d4vid
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 37
Review Date: May 6, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Nice built, cheap, sharp pictures
Cons:
Purple fringing

I bought this lens after reading some reviews comparing it with Canon 17-40L. I already have Tamron 28-75 F2.8 and really love this one, so I think Tamron 17-35 will have the same quality.

After some tests, I found that it suffers quite badly from purple fringing, especially if the background is bright. Other than that, it can produce sharp pictures. My Tamron 28-75 lens doesn't have this CA issue.


May 6, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add d4vid to your Buddy List  
nzrubber
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 30, 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 88
Review Date: May 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $385.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent value for money, sharp photos, good colour, contrast well constructed.
Cons:
Slightly slower focus speed than L glass. Focusing ring moves

I was lucky enough to purchase this near new lense thru an online auction in NZ. The above price also included a Polarizer and UV Filter. After having used solely a Canon 70-200 2.8L, and old borrowed 35-135L I was blown away by the wide angle of view. Auto focus was quick but not quite as quick as the L. Images of closeup shots were crisp and clear. Image detail on wide angle distance shots were good too. The motion of the focus ring took some getting used to but isn't an issue. Contrast and colour is very similar to the 70-200. I'm sure the 17 -35 will get equal amount of use along with the 70-200.

May 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add nzrubber to your Buddy List  
jurginas
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 11, 2005
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 6
Review Date: May 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros:
Cons:

I did't have a nice oportunity to try Tamron 17-35 / 2.8-4 lens before paying money. But after some shoots with my Fuji FinePix S2 pro ( how incredibly expanded cameras name, indeed...) I say in my mind: I am a clever man. Only one aspect of the lens is unussual to me - lens weight.

May 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jurginas to your Buddy List  
camera obscura
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 21, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
Review Date: May 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Good price compared to 17-40 L, solid build, very sharp for most of the image.
Cons:
AF a bit noisy but it's not that important. Goes slightly soft at edges but this is expected.

I bought this lens after reviews on this site and a comparisson I saw of this and the 17-40 L which showed it was just as good. Like many I could not afford the canon 17-40 L, especially in the U.K where it is almost twice the price of the lens in the US. The lens seems quite big to me with 77mm filter thread but apparently it is compact compared to others in this focal length. I saw the 17-40L and that looked huge ! Having a zoom at this length actualy seems like a good idea so you can compose correctly before any cropping that would result from using a prime.

It seems very sharp, not as consistently as sharp from centre to edge as the canon ef 50 1.8 but much better than the 18-55 efs kit lens. There is a slight yellow cast which can be adjusted in photoshop or raw later and it seems nice and contrasty. I feel glad I purchased it as I was missing the wide angle element in my photography. It would be nice if there was a hyperfocal scale distance on the lens but this is common to new lenses which do not have adjustable f-stops on the actual lens, (all done via the camera body these days). The lens does come with a chart though and I worked out that if you set it at 3m and use F8 you generally get 1m to infinity in focus at 17mm to about 24/ 28.


May 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add camera obscura to your Buddy List  
perpera
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 2
Review Date: Apr 25, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Fast at the wide end. Very sharp. Excellent colour and contrast. Comparable to Canon 17-40 L but faster and cheaper.
Cons:
None for the price

I bought the Sigma 18-125 for my Rebel XT, but returned it because it was way too soft and the AF noisy.

I decided to go for the Canon 17-40 L (which a friend of mine own), but found a used copy of the Tamron and decided to try it because of the price and faster aparture at the wide end.

I strongly recommend the lens. Its sharpness, colours and picture uniformity is as good as Canon's 17-40mm L.


Apr 25, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add perpera to your Buddy List  
PANASA
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 12, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $475.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent Build Quality, Silent & Fast than Expected, Excellent Results
Cons:
None so far

I saw this lens being used by one of my friend who is a professional nature photographer. He uses it with Nikon F5 and He recommended this lens to me.

I bought this lens for my canon 10D. Excellent build Quality, Fast and Excellent Very Impressive results. The 2.8 aperture on this lens is great. I will recommend it.


Mar 12, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add PANASA to your Buddy List  
lenyoso
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 8, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 102
Review Date: Mar 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $470.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Very sharp with good contrast. Punchy. It feels sturdy enough. good feel to the zoom and focus rings. Very light. Low distortion. (I actually miss it).
Cons:
No depth of field window

I first used this with Superia film and had it developed at the pharmacy. Wow! Very sharp with great contrast. I was taken aback by the lack of distortion which was severe on my FD 24mm compared to this lens. I actually miss the distortion on the especially wide angle end. I used it extensively in Big Bend NP over the Christmas/New Years break and I am very happy with this lens. You do get some distortion on the edges and it is evident in the prints and slides.

I recently purchased the 10D 1.6X and I am still learning with this camera buit my initial reactions are the same (I don't know why they might be different but some posts state that the combination of camera and lens may be different between digital and film..?? Its just light correct?)

I was somewhat dissappointed with the lack of a depth of window. I can adjust. They do provide a very good DOF chart with the lens.

I chose this lens after looking at a test between it and the 17-40 L and there was not much difference in the test. It used a digital cam.

I am so impressed with this lens - It has definitely raised my opinion about third party lenses.


Mar 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add lenyoso to your Buddy List  
DocNice
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 526
Review Date: Mar 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $460.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: good quality for the price, good build, center sharpness
Cons:
none for the price

I strongly recommend this lens for the serious amateur. Like all serious amateurs, I want the pro quality stuff, but like most I can't justify the $$$$. The first pictures I got off this lens stunned me with the center sharpness. I haven't noted the far edges to be extremely sharp or soft, but I haven't seriously tested for that yet either. I read through various reviews, including Popular Photography, that the images you will get off this lens will be very comparable to the Canon 17-40L, and I would agree. Both are known to have good, but not great edge sharpness, great center sharpness, and good contrast.

The 2.8 aperture won't do much for you in terms of depth of field, but allows you to hand hold some shots on overcast days instead of getting out the tripod. So far, flare has not been a problem.

As a backpacker, I need the lens to be sturdy, and so far I am happy with the build quality. It's not a lens you'll want to bang around, but if you take some care with it, you should be able to take it on your adventures safely. The construction is very solid for a plastic build, and the controls seems tight.


Mar 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add DocNice to your Buddy List  
Virgil
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 30, 2004
Location: Austria
Posts: 17
Review Date: Jan 31, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: fast, silent, nice feel
Cons:
zoomring worked a bit too easy, didnīt found the right position to mount at the first time

Had today the opportunity to have same test shots with this fine lens. Worked very nice, quick, quitely - all in all a nice lens BUT compared to my Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED it wasnīt sharper nor was the viewfinder brighter as reports claimed.

Anyhow - if somebody needs a 17-35 ranged lens - take this fine lens in consideration itīs worth it.



Jan 31, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Virgil to your Buddy List  

   



Tamron 17-35mm f2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
44 192053 Oct 23, 2012
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $393.34
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
8.09
8.94
8.6
sp-af17-35


Page:  1 · 2 · 3  next