 |
|
|
riversen
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 7, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Jun 13, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $449.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fantastic lens for a fantastic price at an aperture of f/2.8... WOW! Great focus, tact sharp, and decent build.
|
|
Cons:
|
Yes, it is a bit noisier than Canon's USM motors, but it really isn't that bad. In all, there is very little negative I have to say about this lens.
|
|
|
I have to continue my shots, but what I have taken so far are very nice. I like the f/2.8 and the sharpness is pretty strong all the way through from 17mm to 50mm. I feel very confident with an aperture of f/2.8 as I do with the smaller apertures. It does take a bit getting used to the reversed zoom. Focus is a bit noisier than my Canon's, but it is NOT bad at all. I think anyone wanting a wide lens will like this, especially at the price. Yes, there is no IS and, yes, this is not a USM motor. Otherwise, it is a great lens. Enjoy!!!
|
|
 Jun 13, 2007
|
|
wcastleman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Nov 21, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 310
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $419.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Low weight and compact
OK image quality for small jpg's and 5x7's
|
|
Cons:
|
Poor quality control; 1st copy wouldn't autofocus on XTi
Slow noisy focus
Image quality so so
|
|
I bought one to see if it would be sharp enough for f/2.8 portrait work with an APS-C camera. I wouldn't use it to produce 8x10 prints.
I tested two new lenses, the first wouldn't autofocus. The second had 50% MTF and resolution performance that was generally on the low end against other comparably priced lenses (Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Macro).
I have summarized my experience here:
http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/17-85compare/index.htm
There are many happy Tamron 17-50 owners. It could be that I just got two bad copies in a row. If you buy one, make sure you have the option to return yours for an immediate exchange with your dealer or return for refund if yours is defective.
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2007
|
|
THarley
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 3, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Razor sharp, lightweight and not too large. Colors are great and it handles flare in a fairly decent manner.
|
|
Cons:
|
Noisy and not superfast AF.
|
|
|
I've had this lens for a year now an must say that I am completely satisfied with it.
|
|
|
Jun 3, 2007
|
|
Liftik
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 72
|
|
Review Date: Jun 3, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $419.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, fast focus, not noisy, size and weight, I love this lens
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
on my Nikon D200 the lens focus quickly and quietly for and for a none Silent Wave, hard to discern the differences compared to a SW lens.
|
|
|
Jun 3, 2007
|
|
Shiva Shankar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 2, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 116
|
|
Review Date: May 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Razor Sharp images! Cant beat the price to image quality ratio. Solid build. Reasonably fast.
|
|
Cons:
|
Even with f/2.8, will occasionally search in low light (when using AF). Really noisy AF
|
|
|
Probably the best, or definitely one of the best cost to quality ratio when it comes to affordable fast lens. The image quality on this lens in unbelievable. On bright sunny day when used for capturing threads of waterfalls, and using a really low aperture setting, diffraction is not an issue at all! Comes without the IS, but for this price you cannot hope for one. Use a tripod and you are quite ok for longer shutters. Solid build quality and the lens feels about right in your hands. Does not make the D-SLR front heavy (and I have a really light small one). All in all a perfect walkaround lens and an excellent alternative to the more pricier canon/nikon options. Just leanr to live with the noisy AF.
|
|
|
May 31, 2007
|
|
Sorensiim
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 30, 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 403
|
|
Review Date: May 30, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
SHARP! Absolutely killer lens at this price. Great for parties, weddings etc.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF is a bit noisy.
|
|
I've had this lens for about a month, and just joined to recommend it.
I love this lens. Same range as my kit zoom, but with amazing sharpness all across the range, and even wide open. RAZOR sharp if stepped down to F/4. This picture is just a shot with the camera held out in one hand, but shows something about the sharpness: Http://www.gutaarn.dk/files/IMG_4087.JPG - Taken at 17mm & F/4
It's the full, un-edited jpg straight from my 400D. A Speedlite 430EX was used too. Full exif info in the jpeg.
Picked up a used (9 months old, PERFECT nick) copy for around $450, and what a great buy. If I ever lost it, I would run straight to the store to buy a new one. It is every bit as sharp as my Canon EF 50mm F/1.8 Mk II @ F/2,8 - And even sharper @ f/4. I Will never, never part with this lens.
Only con is the AF "noise". A slight whir can be heard when focusing, but no worse than the 50mm F/1.8. Not exactly something that scares people away, but in a silent room you will hear it. Still an absolutely GREAT buy! I Wish I could give it 11 out of 10 for price rating.
|
|
|
May 30, 2007
|
|
Archimago
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 14, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 29, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp. Definately usable at f2.8 IF you have a good copy. Overall very good IQ. Light weight. Good price. Fast AF speed on Nikon D200.
|
|
Cons:
|
Plastic construction. Durability issues? Not as fast or silent as AF-S of course...
|
|
|
Bought for NIKON.
Went through 2 copies and definately the 2nd copy was MUCH better. The first copy I received was "Assembled in China" and had major issues with infinity focusing from about 28mm onward. Obviously soft especially at f2.8 with shallow DOF.
I sent that back and the next copy was "Made In Japan". The focus now is sharp and usable even wide open at f2.8. Stopped down to f5.6 and further, it's one of my sharpest lenses. The 7 rounded aperture blades produces rather good bokeh on this lens. Contrast and color rendition with portraits have been excellent. I haven't seen CA or edge sharpness issues ruin my pictures yet.
Construction is a bit plasticky but the good part is that it's light so don't be bashing this around! The 6 year warranty here in Canada is very impressive.
Overall, this serves my purpose as a "walkaround" fast zoom. Works wonderfully with weddings - plus light enough that you don't need to do weights to wield this over a long day of shooting :-). At 1/3 price of Nikon 17-55/2.8 DX with essentially equivalent image quality, I'm happy. (The Nikon has AF-S for faster focusing but I find the focus speed good enough.) Make sure you buy at a place with good refund/exchange policy just in case you get a lemon...
|
|
|
May 29, 2007
|
|
KCJ1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 23, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 108
|
|
Review Date: May 26, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Price is good, color/contrast are good
|
|
Cons:
|
Images are soft. I am sending the lens back because of this. Much softer than my other lenses. This shows up in prints, not just on the monitor.
|
|
|
It's just too soft for me, and this shows up in prints as well as the monitor. I'm sending it back. On the positive side, the color and contrast seem very good.
I can soften up a sharp image if I need to, but sharpening up a soft image is another thing. A shame, because otherwise it seems great. But soft is soft, so back it goes.
|
|
|
May 26, 2007
|
|
silverthorn11
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 30, 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 18, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
value for money, great performer for its price, good weight, sharp and accurate. good for low light with the f2.8, good build (although its not an L), gives canon L a good run for its money
|
|
Cons:
|
focusing a little noisy, not weather-sealed
|
|
|
i'm a proud owner of a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 as of this afternoon! Very happy with this lens.
Reasons which made me buy this over Canon 17-40mm f4 L:
1) PRICE!!!! For $660, it is almost half the cost of the cheapest Canon L Lens
2) Not using FF camera. Currently using Canon 20D, very happy with it and so not going to use a FF camera until maybe in 3-5 years time, by that time, I believe there will be a newer and better L Lens for me. Buy only when u need to use it.
3) f2.8! Amazing, great at low light and the bokeh is beautiful. 10 times better than my kit lens!
4) the extra 10mm, it's useful, a little more ranger than the Canon 40mm
5) the weight is good, almost as heavy as the L, as it has supposedly more glass, and the turn direction opposite of Canon does not bother me a bit.
6) Image quality is excellent! I would say it is almost as good as an L lens, maybe it is just 5-10% less sharp than Canon (although it's very hard to tell them apart), the price just does not justify this difference.
7) I'm not earning as a photographer, no justification to get an L lens. Just a serious amatuer.
8) Tamron has a service centre in Singapore (which i just found out) and the warranty is 3 years (1 + 2 extended). Great! what more can I ask?
9) free lens hood! yipee!!!
10) colour reproduction does not lose out to canon L lens.
If you are also struggling with the same dilemma, if you are like me, a serious amatuer, I say get this Tamron, it's worthed it.
11) if u want to sell in 2-3 years time, sure got buyer (it's new now), the most you lose $150-200 max! that works out to be about only $50 per year of usage. I think it's great. But for me, it's a keeper for the long run.
|
|
|
May 18, 2007
|
|
czechmate
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 7, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 230
|
|
Review Date: May 16, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely sharp, even wide open, light, great value for the money, excellent alternative to L lenses, as a matter of fact, probably better glass, nice bokeh, feels fine, very quick focusing, focus IQ is very good, even makes older brother tamron 28-75 f/2.8 look bad, rarely hunts, and best of all, add a flash to this, and then zoom in photoshop to pixel pic and see the amazing detail.
|
|
Cons:
|
Does not prepare breakfast for you
|
|
Do I need to say anything else, look at the positives. I'm SO glad that I bought this lens, instead of looking at canons (more expensive). I like to do research, and this seemed like the lens to get. It was, and more. I'll never hesitate to get a 3rd party lens that has good reviews.
Just became a father and using this lens exclusively, sickening detail, very very happy with it..czech it out, tons of samples:
www.flickr.com/photos/martinmarek/show/
you can view pics @ larger sizes just take out the show part of the site above.
Great great lens, i will have beautiful baby pics all b/c of this sweet lens. Duh!
Czechmate
|
|
|
May 16, 2007
|
|
benny_g
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 4, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: May 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
i love it..... for the money ... unreal
|
|
Cons:
|
err99???? has this happened to anyone>?
|
|
|
love it .... use it for alot of weddings... great dof.... a little barrel distortion but who is complaining.
only thing is i keep getting err99 when i need the lens the most...in critical situation
sending it back for check
so very sharp
well done tamron
benny
|
|
|
May 9, 2007
|
|
Y_vdm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 20, 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 1301
|
|
Review Date: May 8, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
ligth, sharp, build, hood
|
|
Cons:
|
no USM
|
|
|
Never buying a lens trough Internet, I prefer to test at the shop. They let me test 3 items of this lens on my 20D. One was really soft, the two others reasonably sharp.
Build quality is not like my L lenses but it's OK. I had a (very) bad with the Sigma model and this Tamron gives the result that I expect.
No DXO driver for this lens at this time. Hope it will be available soon.
|
|
|
May 8, 2007
|
|
mirages
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Apr 3, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 299
|
|
Review Date: May 5, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
You name it.
|
|
Cons:
|
For the buck, no valid complaint.
|
|
|
Just a very fine lens to use and to own.
I would guess this may be Tamron's best
in their lineup, or a close second. Wouldn't
hesitate to recommend this to anyone; my
copy arrived like a jewel with no issues. A
tremedous value, and the speed in most
normal situations obviates the need for IS.
For the price and utility this is a can't miss!
|
|
|
May 5, 2007
|
|
Stuart Bell
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 11, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 754
|
|
Review Date: Apr 27, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Range; price; optical quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Barrel distortion in the 17-24mm range; Tamron quality control.
|
|
|
My first copy was very sharp, but started giving 'Err99" on my 20D when set to 30-50mm, after about 3 weeks. Was replaced by the dealer, no problem. My second copy is sharp. The reported noisy focussing isn't a big deal, IMHO, as in real-life use (as opposed to 'testing') the focus is usually only adjusting over a short range, and the 'blip' of the focusssing motor is very short.
The lens is excellent for a crop body DSLR. I find it resistant to flare, and that it gives good colour and contrast. I have no problem with AF in low light, which may be due to the extra 'f/2.8' AF sensors on a 20D (and 30D and 400D etc). The zoom ring works in the reverse direction to Canon zooms, but that's no problem since my Canon lenses are all primes, so the adjustment is easy.
|
|
|
Apr 27, 2007
|
|
antnis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 7, 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Apr 25, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Very good resolution in center when stopped down
|
|
Cons:
|
Appalling field curvature with 1.5 crop factor
|
|
|
Kinda mixed bag this one, tried 3 examples and ended in returning them. Center is great but at 17mm far corners were mushy at all apertures. Also, at 50mm when shooting flat surfaces from a short distance corners were absolutely sub-standard. So don't even dream of shooting paintings or book pages with this. Or then leave some space for cropping the corners out. But if you are aware of these limitations and don't mind go and buy it, it is very good between 20 and 35mm.
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2007
|
|
mastadont
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 26, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 75
|
|
Review Date: Apr 24, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $420.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, contrast, price, 2.8, resistance to flare, weight, hood, 6-year warranty
|
|
Cons:
|
Tamron support, no case, quality control
|
|
|
Just a cool walk-around lens. Extremely sharp after I had had to send it for recalibration - it was front-focusing.
It took 2.5 months to get the lens back from Tamron's service center. Bad, bad, bad!
Colors are a little bit cooler than I would want them to be.
Otherwise, no complaints. Just a good lens (I chose it over Canon EF 17-40 4L) that is usable at 2.8.
I wish Tamron would come up with an IS for the lens.
|
|
|
Apr 24, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
187
|
367597
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
