 |
|
|
joyz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 31, 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Nov 27, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast & cheap for constant f2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
Quality control is a Joke! Tested 4 copies and all bad
|
|
|
Went and bought this lens 2 months ago and gone thru 4 copies. (grrr)
1st copy: Front focus and deep scratch on metal mount
2nd copy: There's a black object (1mm long) inside lens (back)
3rd copy: Dust inside lens (front)
4th copy: Lens front focus badly
All prospect buyers are advised to check their lens thouroughly and always buy from local shop so you can exhange lens easily
|
|
 Nov 27, 2008
|
|
joyz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 31, 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Nov 26, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap for constant 2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
Quality Control is a JOKE. Tested 4 Copies and all bad.
|
|
|
Believe it or not, I went and buy this lens months ago and went thru 4 copies and still no good. At the end I just asked for a refund. and the worst thing is that this is "Made in Japan". The next batch would be from China.
I really wish I can get a good copy with this lens.
1st copy: Lens front focus and deep scratch at the metal mount.
2nd copy: A big debris inside lens (back)
3rd copy: Dust inside lens (front)
4th copy: Lens front focus badly
I seriously ask for prospect buyers to check their lens thoroughly and buy from a local shop so you can exchange easily
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2008
|
|
gberger
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 29, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 216
|
|
Review Date: Nov 25, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $370.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp lens, half the price of Canon.
|
|
Cons:
|
None really. It is a little noisier focusing than Canon, but to me this is nitpicking.
|
|
|
I had to return the first copy of this lens, it was out of focus in the top left 15% of the image. The second copy, however, is sharp as a tack. Just an incredible lens. I was ready to go for the Canon version after the first copy, I"m glad I didn't. I wouldn't mind spending the money if I thought I was getting something for it, but this lens leaves nothing to be desired. IS is great, I love it on my 70-200L, but for this focal length and size I don't feel I need it.
|
|
|
Nov 25, 2008
|
|
vinke
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 8, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 343
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $395.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Relative to its price, everything positive: sharp, fast w/ constant 2.8, minimum distortion, flare and artifacts. Relatively small and light. Build quality and AF noise could be better, but then I'd expect to pay more for it, too.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2008
|
|
jchopick
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 5, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Nov 21, 2008
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, Appearance
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy,Slow,Not Sharp as Nikon Lens, Front Focus, F-- Errors
|
|
|
Problem:
A Colleague and I bought this lense and had nothing but issues starting with constantly getting F-- Errors on our Nikon D80's. We do not get those errors with our Nikon Lenses. Also both lenses seem to focus off target, Mostly much lower than where we were actually focusing. I am sure that we both got a bad copy, but if this is what to expect from other than Nikon Lenses. We have both agreed to stick to Nikon Lenses.
Sharpness:
The Images were also not as sharp as my 18-135mm stock lens by a mile.
Build Quality:
This lense was very heavy on the D80 compared to even the 70-300mm VR Lense. The Appearance and feel was nice, but it just didn't measure up.
Conclusion:
Gumbo Lens! We returned both the lenses!
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2008
|
|
jcw1982
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Sep 14, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1449
|
|
Review Date: Nov 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
nice build, sharpness, good color and contrast, price
|
|
Cons:
|
none really
|
|
|
I had pretty much stayed away from wide zooms, the Canons I could afford didn't impress me much, and a couple third-party lenses I had tried left much to be desired. I was using wide primes, a 24 and a 35 before deciding to give this lens a try, thanks mainly to the good reviews it had gotten here on FM.
After owning for awhile, I have to admit I like it. The lens has a nice build to it; to zoom ring is nice and firm with no play in it. The focus ring is smooth, and has a very short "throw"-going from infinity to the closest focusing distance with only a slight turn of the ring. It does not have internal zooming so the lens does get longer when zoomed out to 50mm but not too bad. The included lens hood attaches firmly and locks into place.
Some have mentioned the lack of USM on this lens and the noise of the motor. It is a little noiser than Canon USM lenses, but quieter than Canon-made lenses without USM from my experience. Also, the short throw of the focus ring when focusing means the motor isn't required as much when subject distances change.
Comparing the images from the Tamron to other Canon lenses I have owned/used(17-40, 20-35, 28-105, 24, 35) I find the Tamron images comparable, and in a couple cases superior. For the price of the lens and the performance I have seen from mine, I am glad I bought it and have no regrets picking it over the Canon product.
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2008
|
|
skibum5
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 12988
|
|
Review Date: Oct 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
ridiculously sharp, colors and contrast not bad, very compact, incredibly low CA on the long end, excellent build (it has survived things that would've destroyed some L's!)
|
|
Cons:
|
noisy AF, AF not good at AI servo
|
|
|
truly superb lens
it survived an 6' drop onto hard concrete with nothing more than the $3 front filter ring cracked and flew off the car seat to the floor with no issue and into the sand at the beach with no harm (otoh it seems to be sneaky and likes to fall! over my entire photography life this lens accounts of 3 of my 4 drops ever!)
sold the 17-40L with no regrets after getting this lens
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2008
|
|
wuping
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 24, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 77
|
|
Review Date: Oct 10, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, compact, fast and sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
Other than just a little noisywhen focusing.
|
|
|
I have been shooting with this lens for about 8 months now from news events, weddings and snapshots of the family. The image quality is amazing for the price and sharp at 2.8. No regrets buying the Tamron over the Canon equivilant.
|
|
|
Oct 10, 2008
|
|
twistedlim
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3047
|
|
Review Date: Oct 9, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp at 2.8. Good contrast wide open. Edges are the best I have seen in this zoom range.
|
|
Cons:
|
Had to go back to tamron as it was soft on one side. Came back perfect. Can misfocus in low light.
|
|
|
Over all a very nice lens. After being sent back it came in sharp (sharper than 17-55) the entire zoom range. Excellent edge sharpness after fix. Reasonably light and compact. A very nice value.
|
|
|
Oct 9, 2008
|
|
zakb7
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 25, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 6, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
good zoom range, good image quality, hood included, f/2.8, accurate focus, pinch cap
|
|
Cons:
|
noisy focus motor, 67mm filter size, zoom twists opposite of Canon zooms, rear cap only screws on in one position
|
|
|
This is a good crop-sensor alternative to more fragile kit lenses. Of course, its best feature is that it opens up to f/2.8 across the zoom range. That fact alone would make me take a hard look at it.
It works well mechanically; focus is accurate and on par with non-USM Canon lenses speedwise. As many others have noted, it is rather noisy when hunting for focus, though not nearly loud enough to disturb a wedding ceremony or a recital.
It's sharp enough wide open, and very sharp stopped down. Some barrel distortion is present at 17mm. 67mm filter size is a small nuisance, just means you probably don't have any extra filters lying around that'll fit.
f/2.8 is a great feature, especially at the 50mm end. You'll get shots with this lens you can't get with slower f/3.5-5.6 models.
Overall, I'd recommend it to someone with a crop-sensor camera who was looking for a good walk-around zoom lens that opens up to f/2.8.
|
|
|
Oct 6, 2008
|
|
ibizargak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 19, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Oct 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $374.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focusing, light, reasonable price, solid build.
|
|
Cons:
|
Inconsistent AF. Lack of IS at this price DOES matter.
|
|
|
It took me a while to realize this lens was focusing inconsistently. In fact until I did some super zooming with the LiveView function on my new XSi I had no idea how sharp this lens could be - if properly focused. I had received the camera with the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens kit lens. Which was a decent little lens, just too slow for me I believed. I also had no idea how much I have come to rely on IS after using the Canon 17-85 for years. Again I believed this lens was too slow for me. I thought long and hard about my lens choice for this camera body, and this was the best I could reasonably afford. The Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is insanely expensive. I can say that even slightly out-of-focus this lens is as sharp as the EF-S 17-85 was. Colors are a little neutral but I've corrected that in camera functions. It focuses quickly and the noise you supposedly hear is so short in duration as to be scarcely noticeable. I'm going to have this lens re-calibrated and then I believe it's going to be my carry-around lens. But I am extremely disappointed I received a front-focusing copy and I hesitate to recommend this lens because of that. Other wise the sharpness is comparable to my cheap but tack-sharp EF 50mm f/1.8 II.
|
|
|
Oct 3, 2008
|
|
bollywood1970
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 29, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 22, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
A great bang for the buck! Good for lowlight photography. Nice wide angle! Great colour/contrast.
|
|
Cons:
|
Hunts in low light causing focus to not lock in on target, barrel distortion at 17mm. A little on the noisy side. Hood can cast a shadow when using external flash.
|
|
I recently used this lens to shoot a wedding in bright and low light conditions and the results were not bad! Here is a sample of the shots taken.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/reggies_pics/sets/72157607294942700/show/
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2008
|
|
MadPriest
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 19, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 19, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $638.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, lightweight
|
|
Cons:
|
not too fast when the light is poor
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2008
|
|
enti
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 20, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 50
|
|
Review Date: Sep 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
fast, constant aperture, light, nice action, discreet, good lens-cap, excellent grip, lens hood included
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
This is the first non-canon lens I have bought. I was slightly wary, but wanted a general lens for my cropped 450D and felt the Canon equivalent was too big & heavy...I already have a 5D & 24-105 so this is my "lightweight, walk-around" solution.
I have not been disappointed - even when comparing it to Canon lenses much more expensive, this lens feels quality & delivers sharp, accurate photos every time. The relatively small size/weight makes it an ideal match for the smaller EOS bodies.
The image quality is sensational, the manufacturing quality beats some of my Canon lenses and is first class - nice sticky grip, "damped" zoom action, accurate & quick focusing.
In terms of value for money, this takes some beating. I love my L's and will not try to compare this to them, but this tamron compares extremely well to the consumer Canons, yet delivers at a much lower price point.
If I were trying to be critical, the motor is slightly noisy (but not annoyingly so) and I'm so used to Canon zooms that I find the "opposite direction" zoom a bit fiddly (but that is hardly a major concern either).
All in all, an excellent lens, especially for the price.
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2008
|
|
zincmask
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 13, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 196
|
|
Review Date: Sep 11, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IQ, Apeture(2.8), Price,
|
|
Cons:
|
Bokeh, Lowlight AF performance, Slower AF compared to Ultrasonic lens
|
|
|
Great lens! I have changed from 18-55 kit lens, to 24-105 L lens, and finally to Tamron 17-50. Since I got this lens, my 50.8 lens eating dust!! Sharp wide open!! It can stand against prime lens , if just looking at the sharpness. But I do like the bokeh from the nifty-fifty. But it has better AF than 50.8, which for me it means, it's more reliable. Anyways, must try!!!
(Oh BTW, it took me 3 tries to pick the right lens! =(
|
|
|
Sep 11, 2008
|
|
vve77
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 31, 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 1, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, price, constant f/2.8 aperture at all focal lengths
|
|
Cons:
|
CA sometimes visible, occasional focus hunting in low light
|
|
|
For the price it's nearly impossible to get a better performing lens.
I also considered the Sigma 17-70, but I'm glad I've chosen the Tamron. Sharpness is very good at all focal lengths and aperture settings. Barrel distortion at 17 mm is there, but not much of a problem. F/2.8 is perfectly usable at all focal lengths which makes it a good indoor lens.
Focus is generally acurate, but on my 350D it sometimes hunts in low light or in some backlit conditions. I've read this is mostly a 350D issue. I've seen it focus a number of times in complete darkness though using AF assist beam.
The lens is very resistant to flaring. CA is well controlled, but visble in some shots at pixel level. Nothing really to worry about.
The AF is noisy, but I don't mind. The zoom ring turns opposite to Canon, but I like it that way.
At EUR 320 ($470) it is almost guaranteed to please you.
It's been said that there may be quality issues with the Chinese-built version. I've got the Japanese-built lens.
|
|
|
Sep 1, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
187
|
365071
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
