Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: B Stevens  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add B Stevens to your Buddy List
Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]

Review Date: Jun 23, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Sharp wide open, very sharp from corner to corner @f/5.6, very little distrotions, f/2.8 throughout the whole zoomrange, cheap, fast enough AF and a pretty solid feel.
Very noisy AF, colours look a bit flat, no constant MF, nothing to bad for a serious beginner though.

This product is indeed recommended by me because of the following reasons:

This lens is very sharp zoomed out and zoomed in, sharp wide open in the center, and is very sharp from edge to edge when stopped down around f5.6.
There are very little distortions, nothing no one wouldn't expect from such a lens and nothing photoshop can't fix either.
The lens feels well build and the plastic hood clicks on more easily than two canon lenses i own, (100mm 2.8 usm macro and the 200mm 2.8L II USM)
Overal you get some very nice features for only 350 euro's!

But when trying to be and look more professioinal and for instance take a look at some pictures made with the Canon EF16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, i feel the colours could be more rich, more contrasty and life-like.
Maybe i am wrong, i did not have the chance to test them side by side and of course with photoshop this also can be pretty much corrected.
The price difference between the two makes it somewhat unfair to campare them with each other, i know.

Another downside MIGHT be that the AF (altough being fast) is also very noisy, when shooting an quiet performance or show of some sort the focus sound is deffinatly be heard by everyone around you.
No constant manual focus is a llittle downside too. Conclusion:
For serious beginners or not to high demanding folks this lens is Highly recommended!

For serious beginners or not to high demanding folks this lens is Highly recommended!

But for semi-pro's or people who just want to go a step further, i gues the Canon EF16-35mm f/2.8L II USM is the only real alternative.
The 17-40 4L is very nice of course but not f/2.8 and the Canon EF 17-55mm IS USM is not build well enough, way to much of a dust sucker to cost that much.
And his cheaper brother 17-85mm has the same problem + more blur and colour distortions @17mm than the cheap 18-55mm kitlens!

happy buying!