|
|
rideklein
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 2, 2010
Location: N/A
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Jun 9, 2010
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $375.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Good-looking lens. Zoom lock.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF is consistently off, hunts a lot, and is very loud.
|
|
I own a T1i. The Tamron 17-50 was my second lens purchase, following the 50mm f/1.8 II. I was drawn to it by its performance likenesses (on paper) to the Canon 17-55 and its price. But I was sorely disappointed with the Tamron.
1. It mis-focused probably 75% of the time. I suppose I could have had it calibrated, but there were other issues with the lens that calibration would not have fixed...
2. Its AF hunts a lot in low light. I bought the lens primarily for use in low light situations, not for shallow DOF outdoors.
3. Its AF is very loud. So loud that there are you tube videos capturing how loud it is. Ouch. I mainly shoot family and friends, and candid shots are uncomfortable when the lens is super noisy.
4. It's a good-looking and heavy-constructed lens. In the end though, I think that's all it has going for it.
|
|
 Jun 9, 2010
|
|
Kurt777
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 7, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jun 7, 2010
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $400.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, great value, good build, excellent colors
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
I bought this lens to replace kit lens on 20d. I was very surprised by the good quality pics. this is a great alternative to the Canon 17-55 IS with the price about $700 less. Enough to buy a 50mm 1.4 and an 85mm 1.8. Now that's value.
|
|
|
Jun 7, 2010
|
|
Kurt777
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 7, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jun 7, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 7, 2010
|
|
wassphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 27, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 25
|
|
Review Date: Jun 4, 2010
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Optical quality. Sharp when focus works. fixed f/2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
Focus is very unreliable/hit and miss and very noisy too
|
|
Not recommended for serious shooters. Focus on this lens could become a nightmare unless you're only using it for landscapes with very small apertures. Already sold my copy.
|
|
|
Jun 4, 2010
|
|
Schuit
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 10, 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 10
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009
|
|
tonyliau
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 5, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Nov 10, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $410.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, lightweight, consistent f/2.8, great focal length for a crop body (27-80mm equivalent), great IQ for the price.
|
|
Cons:
|
IQ (understandably) does not quite compare with the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS which is nearly three times the price.
|
|
This is the lens I grab when I don't feel like lugging my heavy L-glass around. I am willing to sacrifice the slight IQ for the convenience of this light, fast zoom. 17-50mm is perfect on a crop body to walk around with.
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2009
|
|
Guidenet
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 23, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 95
|
|
Review Date: Oct 18, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $299.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very fast, sharp and contrasty.
|
|
Cons:
|
The build quality doesn't match Nikon, but it costs considerably less. The built in motor models whine, chirp and tend to hunt, while the older screw drive models are perfect.
|
|
With the screw drive for Nikon F mount, I believe this is the best DX crop camera lens in this particular range. I had a Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 for around six months and was dissapointed in the optical quality. It was soft all around. I sold it and purchased this Tamron because I did want this range and had heard wonderful things about it optically.
I tried several copies of the built in motor with its micro motor instead of sonic ring motor as found that they whines, chirped and hunted focus. I then found a left over brand new screw drive model that they heavily discounted to me. Boy was I happy. This lens performs superbly in all ways. It's fast, doesn't hunt, and is incredibly sharp and contrasty. The only negative if it is, is that it has a warmer cast than the Nikon. If I don't like it, it's easily fixed during processing.
I consider this lens to be a couple notches below the 17-55 f/2.8 Nikon with respect to build quality but a couple of notches above that Nikon in optical quality, at least in my experience. I wish that Tamron would embrace sonic ring type focusing motors like Nikon, Canon, Sigma and others.
Promaster rebadges this lens and can be a real bargain with screw drive models still in stock. They are the same lens.
|
|
|
Oct 18, 2009
|
|
transoptic1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 904
|
|
Review Date: Oct 12, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good walkaround for the price, good contrast/saturation, decently sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
AF, tiny manual switch, kind of plasticy
|
|
I think this is the best lens in this zoom range, at 2.8 for the price.
I'm ready to upgrade to L glass, but I need to sacrifice a little reach to save bank. I'm thinking the 17-35 2.8L
This lens has served well for a few years, though. Really sharp in the center, stopped down of course; wide open near the edges things get a little fuzzy but nothing hugely disappointing. The colors and contrast are nice, especially on higher-end image sensors.
Auto focus is the Achilles Heel on this lens. It's noisy, searches in low light, and could be faster. It has a tiny switch to switch from auto to manual, which takes a few seconds to find, which can be costly in fast environments. I'm wanting to upgrade to a lens that has full-time manual USM.
But, well worth every dollar I paid.
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2009
|
|
stactum
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 5, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 26, 2009
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $409.00
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp-sharp-sharp even wide open, fast at 2.8, useful focal length 17-50mm, lightweight
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality could be better, very noisy, fungus-prone, works only on cropped sensor
|
|
I had this lens for over a year now and what can I say - no regrets buying it! It is a GREAT lens for the money.
At some point I wanted to switch to Canon EF 24-105mm L IS USM lens as my general purpose that cost about $1000 and I used one from work to do a comparison tests between my Tamron and Canon. No question Canon L have IS, quite and much better build quality, but honestly, when it comes to images I think Tamron was on par or sometimes even better. Colors and sharpness wise it is a great lens for the price you pay.
I had to send mine for service since fungus started to develop on the rear element that cost me $155 to repair and I read on some forums that Tamron lenses are somewhat fungus-prone so you may want to keep that in mind when buying Tamron.
|
|
|
Aug 26, 2009
|
|
Janika
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 17, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 367
|
|
Review Date: Aug 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Decent price / performance ratio, It is very sharp, built well for the class it's in, Relatively small n light.
|
|
Cons:
|
Front filter ring is lose, where the hood attaches and I see other folks have the same issue.
|
|
Got this lens second hand, replacing my 3-year old Sigma 17-70 DC. The Tamron is so much sharper for almost the same price. The build quality and the AF sound are comparable to the Sigma. Noticed, the front filter ring is lose on this lens, where the hood attaches and I see other folks have the same issue. It just wobbles and you can hear it too, but it does not effect image quality. Tamron should fix this issue at no charge!
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2009
|
|
mattr762
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 3, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 438
|
|
Review Date: Aug 16, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $380.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Price. Quality of images. Weight. I love this lens so much I had my work buy one for their camera.
|
|
Cons:
|
Front ring where the hood attaches to rattles and is lose on both my and my works.
|
|
I bought this lens several years ago and have taken thousands of photos with it. I haven't taken it off since I got it. It's the perfect walk around lens. I've used it for several weddings, senior pictures family events and vacation and I've never been disappointed with its performance.
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2009
|
|
ashy
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 22, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 22, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
+ constant, wide aperture & useful zoom range
+ OMG! look @ the price tag! X P
+ already very sharp @ center wide-opened (across the range!), tack sharp when stopped down!
+ chromatic aberration a.k.a color fringing is pretty well controlled
+ fairly quick & accurate internal AF
+ small & light weight for a fast lens
+ quite flare prone
+ great color & contrast (personal preference)
+ comes with hood, brilliant front lens cap design X D
|
|
Cons:
|
- normal focusing motor with transformers-sounded AF X D
- average build quality
- average bokeh "milky-ness" from the 7-blade aperture under certain circumstances
- rear lens cap isn't universal
- front/back focus lottery may strike
- not optically stabilized
- ....... but kill yourself if you ask for more from the price X D
|
|
when QC issue is out of the way, it is such a "fantastically terrific" lens for its price! IMO every cropped-sensor-DSLR users should @ least try this lens!
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2009
|
|
|
