 |
|
|
yido
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 811
|
|
Review Date: Mar 28, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $430.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Optics and price
|
|
Cons:
|
so so build feel, AF noisy
|
|
|
As said, great optics with sharp center and corners. Good control of CA.
Build quality is so so, AF is fast but noisy.
Definitely worth the cost if optics if your main concern.
|
|
 Mar 28, 2007
|
|
traveler
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 8, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3234
|
|
Review Date: Mar 21, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $435.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast and accurate to focus
Nice light but solid build
Amazing price for pro optics
|
|
Cons:
|
not a SWM but it focuses so fast I don't notice
|
|
|
I was fortunate to get my D200 around the same time this lens was released. I sold off a 18-200VR as it simply was not great enough for me in the corners. I decided to go with a 17-50mm range lens and complement it with a 70-300vr. My decision was a good one and has worked out nicely. The 17-50 f2.8 XR DI is instant to focus, exposes correctly, and behaves perfectly in every other way. I certainly see NO compelling reason to pay the $1200 for the Nikon equivalent as it has NO real performance benefit over this model. I tried them both in store and it made NO sense to go with the Nikon in this case. I've had pretty good luck with several select Tamron's in the past. This was has NOT disappointed.......I got mine from Canoga Camera and they are great. NO opened box like some vendors in New York that are respected but shall remain nameless..........
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2007
|
|
donutley
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 404
|
|
Review Date: Mar 21, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, smooth zoom ring, well-balanced. A very competent lens for the money.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
I thought Tamron would be hard-pressed to ever beat the bang-for-the-buck of the 28-75/2.8, but they did with this great lens! It feels better, is built a bit better, and is actually sharper. Even the whining focus motor adds a little fun. Recommended with no reservations.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2007
|
|
Dede Multazam
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 20, 2007
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 20, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice Lens for Canon EF Mount, Very Sharp, Hood Included.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
No Comment
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2007
|
|
Austin Fern
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 16
|
|
Review Date: Mar 16, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $429.99
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, inexpensive, sharp, fast, sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
Focus sound can be disconcerting in a quiet venue...but so can teh shutter on my 20D, build is so-so.
|
|
|
I had originally bought the EF 28-135 IS. I managed to get some pretty nice pictures with that lens. Circumstance allowed me to trade in the 28-135 for something else. Since I had just bought the 70-200 f/2.8 I was looking for something with a little more on the wide end.
The Tamron has been the only lens on my camera for the last week since I bought it. Very nice color and amazingly sharp. When compared to the prices of the other options in this range, this is a hands down winner of a lens.
|
|
|
Mar 16, 2007
|
|
nikt
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 5709
|
|
Review Date: Mar 16, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, sharpness, edge to edge performance at any aperture.
|
|
Cons:
|
faster and quieter would be nice, but then it probably wouldn't cost as little as it does
|
|
|
Should be included as the standard lens in almost every case. Some reports of it not being good enough, so make sure you buy from a reputable dealer. In my opinion, this lens has set a new standard for price / performance.
|
|
|
Mar 16, 2007
|
|
maxim_me
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 22, 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 291
|
|
Review Date: Mar 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp out of camera, great value for f2.8, sturdy built, none of the sigma coating, free lens hood, Great rubber grip,
|
|
Cons:
|
Zoom ring gearing is long, takes many turns from 17 to 50, miss balanced inner elements, left-right sharpness not equal, horrid technical support,
|
|
Had 2 copies of this lens, both had the misaligned inner lens.
The left-right sharpness of image is not the same.
If the left is sharp , the right would be blurry etc.
Mine was "assembled in China" not made in China 
misalignment is very obvious at f2.8, somewhat acceptable at
f5.6. This shows it self more for group shots or people who like to take pics of wall etc.
Still useable.
Image is sharp and contrasty, focus very close around till 4 in away. Good zoom grip and good AF switch over. NOne of the sigma double action thing.
Sturdy build ( ABS engineering plastic ), no Sigma's peel-off-coating, pretty light.
AF is fast enough but slightly slower than Sigma 18-50. Although it's louder but AF accuracy is better in the Tamron.
Yes, AF makes some sound but I never bothered with the sound, dont know why its some people's major concern.
Anycase, if you intend to get one, test it properly at the shop.
Technical support is nonexistence.....
|
|
|
Mar 15, 2007
|
|
susi
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Sep 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2559
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $379.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, light, fast
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
I read a lot of reviews before I purchased and have found that all the praise is deserved! Very sharp and fast in low light where I was hoping it would be. I bought this for portrait /wedding photography and it is perfect for taking in the whole room/church etc and doing it all with natural light.
Excellent price for this little shiner! Highly recommended!
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2007
|
|
incdigital
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 226
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $340.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very Sharp, Lightweight, Compact, Perfect range for DX sensor
|
|
Cons:
|
CA in high contrast areas, Build is plastic and feels plastic, AF is only "ok"...improves if used on D200 or D2X
|
|
|
For my needs(light compact lens that performs well) I can really look over the negative aspects of the lens. I have never bought a Tamron lens before this and after I evaluated the 17-50 I can say I would certainly buy other products from them in the future. Overall a bargain buy IMO.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2007
|
|
Ultima2003
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 47
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, zoom range, and f/2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
soft focus. loud mechanism
|
|
|
While I love my Tammy 28-75, my hopes fell short on the 17-50. I took the 17-50 on vacation leaving other lenses at home for a lighter bag. I was disappointed in most all pictures at any length and aperature. Most shots were outdoors in bright Arizona sunlight at f/7-11. Shutter speeds in the 1/1000's or higher. Even with heavy sharpening they looked soft and out of focus.
With saddness I returned the lense. I was hoping for better performance and I am not highly critical.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2007
|
|
johansec
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 36
|
|
Review Date: Mar 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $389.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, good colors, fast focus, light, affordable
|
|
Cons:
|
Not happy with excessive CA.
|
|
|
I bought this lens because the 17-55 kit lens that came with my Canon 20D had very poor sharpness.
I have used this lens for about a month now. I have been happy with the auto focus and handling. The sharpness is a great improvement over the kit lens and the colors are good.
My one big disappointment is with the amount of CA. I recently went on a camping trip and a lot of the pictures I took included trees with sky behind them. I was excited about some of the pictures when I took them, but was disappointed to find that the CA was excessive enough that I couldn't correct it in Photoshop and was not able to include the photos in my portfolio.
I might try renting the comparable Canon L lens and test shoot both of them side by side and see if I am being unfair to the Tamron.
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2007
|
|
Will Patterson
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Nov 6, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 4550
|
|
Review Date: Mar 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Unbelieveably sharp, great color and contrast, comes with a hood
|
|
Cons:
|
Will only work on APS-C sensors, but that's ok with me!
|
|
|
This was the 3rd lens I bought for my XT. Upon receiving it I immediately did some testing on a tripod in my kitchen to see how sharp the pictures turned out. I was stunned. I honestly don't see how a lens can get any better in terms of focusing ability.
It's got a nice weight to it and balances out well on the XT, and it'll be even better on the 30D I plan on buying shortly.
If you are deciding between this and the 17-40L, get the Tamron! I'm so glad I did!!!
|
|
|
Mar 12, 2007
|
|
Anders H
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 10, 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Mar 10, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap, sharp, decent build quality, comes with hood, light
|
|
Cons:
|
noisy autofocus
|
|
|
I love this lens. It's faily priced, delivers exelent image quality and is just nice to live with. I don't think I'll ever sell this little gem, unless I get a fullframe camera.
The only negative thing I can say about this lens is that it's got a noisy af motor, but I can easily live with that. It's still more quiet than the Pentax K10D + 18-55 smc kit lens.
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2007
|
|
Steve Lundberg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 24, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 19
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp throughout it's range, fast focusing, constant f/2.8, build quality is pretty good
|
|
Cons:
|
Somewhat loud autofocus motor, won't work on a full-frame body (if you decide to upgrade later, etc)
|
|
|
I would not hesitate to recommend this lens to someone looking at this focal length range.
It is a lot less costly than the Canon 17-55 (though the Canon adds +5mm on the long end, IS, and USM to the package). The Tamron comes with a lens hood, unlike the Canon 17-55. This is an excellent first lens for someone who purchased a crop body with no kit lens.
Picture quality is very good. It is sharp throughout, gives very nice brokeh at 2.8, with colors that pop. I have zero regrets about this lens, and highly recommend it.
|
|
|
Mar 9, 2007
|
|
Rubber Soul
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 11, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 636
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely sharp at all focal lengths; Very compact and lightweight design; Best price to performance ratio of any lens;
|
|
Cons:
|
Questionable quality control; loud focusing noise; focus can hunt in very challenging situations --- low contrast objects in low lighting;
|
|
|
What can I say? This is one of the sharpest lenses I own. It starts off fairly sharp at f2.8, and so I certainly do not hesitate using the lens wide open. It noticeably improves at f4, before peaking at f5.6. The lens is amazing --- it's corner-to-corner sharp at all focal lengths. And yes, I've done the obligatory pixel peeping photos of newspaper clips on the wall. Side-by-side comparison shots with my 70-200L and 85 f1.8 lenses were done... and the Tamron's sharpness certainly holds its own.
My complaints with the lens is the loud focusing motor, as well as its tendency to focus inaccurately under very challenging situations --- low contrast subjects under low lighting.
Build quality is superb, and it's as good as I've seen on any non-L Canon lens. The plastic feels dense, and certainly does NOT creak like most EF-S lenses. The thick rubber zoom ring is very nicely tight. My only complaint with regards to the build quality is the somewhat loose focus ring. Not only is it not tight enough, but the focus ring barely rotates a quarter turn from min to max focusing distance. Precise manual focusing can be difficult with this baby.
One of the nicest features of this lens is its compact size! The lens simply looks beautiful on a camera like the EOS 400D or the Nikon D40. Handles extremely well, and it's perfectly balanced. In comparison, the EF-S 17-55 lens is nearly twice as massive (20 cubic inches vs 37 cubic inches) and weights 50% more (435 grams vs 650 grams). Maybe size wouldn't be an issue on a bigger camera like the EOS 30D or Nikon D80. But on the smaller cameras like the 400D and D40, it *is* a big deal. A digital rebel with Tamron 17-50 is about as compact as the bigger point & shoot cameras.
I heartily recommend this lens with only one reservation: Please buy it at a store where you can test it on your owncamera. Tamron's quality control can be fairly questionable. Of the 4 lenses I tested at a store, 2 were great, 1 was badly de-centered, and 1 had a severe backfocusing problem. I would most definitely not risk blindly buying any Tamron or Sigma lens without having tested it first --- and that means a big "NO" to online retailers. Trust me, it's not worth the little online savings to risk getting a lemon.
The HUGE upside of this lens greatly outweighs its negatives. I heartily give it a "10 out of 10". It's not just a great lens for the low price. It's a great lens, PERIOD.
For reference, I've only ever given a "10" for one other lens review --- the heavenly EF 70-200 f/4L IS lens. I rated the 85mm f/1.8 a "9", and gave the EF-S 10-22mm a "8".
|
|
|
Mar 9, 2007
|
|
George E
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 9, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Mar 8, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $430.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
price, feel, sharpness, colors
|
|
Cons:
|
loud
|
|
This is a first class lens at a second class price. I already own the 28-75 and this lens is actually an improvement in build, feel and coloration, which I didnt expect, while maintaining the superb sharpness the 28-75 is famous for.
I havent taken this lens off my camera since I bought it.
The 17-50 has a loud, but timely focusing system. Its accurate and quick, but makes a high pitched motor sound that may turn some people off. I just look at the pics and realize its not a big deal.
Highly recommended for a great walk-around lens, f2.8 across the range for low light quality and distortion is mild, but under control.
I have used this lens as a portrait/still life lens with great results but some say it has too much distortion for professional use in this regard.
Look here for a few samples of this lens' outstanding quality.
|
|
|
Mar 8, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
187
|
365007
|
Apr 25, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
87% of reviewers
|
$412.04
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.10
|
9.31
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
