For lovers, skeptics, and everyone else in between, here is the Tamron SP 17/3.5 thread.
For some reason this lens has been the centre of ongoing controversy. This is due to sample variation, in my opinion. Apparently there are some people (not necessarily FMers) who state this is the worst UWA ever made. I couldn\'t disagree more. Apparently, they have bad samples (or extremely poor skills?)
Please feel free to contribute your images, etc.
I\'ll begin showing why I love this lens so much. A good copy should perform like this (ie.right in line with Modern Photo\'s Test results).
f11 on 5D:
100% from bottom corners, centre, top corners:
No filter was used. This is just how sky looks through this lens.
Here is one wide open on 5D:
100% centre:
Another wide open on 5D:
100%:
Back to f11, on 5D as usual:
100%, bottom corners and centre:
I have lots more, if anyone cares to see them, but I\'d rather see other owners\' samples.
For lovers, skeptics, and everyone else in between, here is the Tamron SP 17/3.5 thread.
For some reason this lens has been the centre of ongoing controversy. This is due to sample variation, in my opinion. Apparently there are some people (not necessarily FMers) who state this is the worst UWA ever made. I couldn\'t disagree more. Apparently, they have bad samples (or extremely poor skills?)
Please feel free to contribute your images, etc.
I\'ll begin showing why I love this lens so much. A good copy should perform like this (ie.right in line with Modern Photo\'s Test results).
f11 on 5D:
100% from bottom corners, centre, top corners:
No filter was used. This is just how sky looks through this lens.
Here is one wide open on 5D:
100% centre:
Another wide open on 5D:
100%:
Back to f11, on 5D as usual:
100%, bottom corners and centre:
I have lots more, if anyone cares to see them, but I\'d rather see other owners\' samples.
For lovers, skeptics, and everyone else in between, here is the Tamron SP 17/3.5 thread.
For some reason this lens has been the centre of ongoing controversy. This is due to sample variation, in my opinion. Apparently there are some people (not necessarily FMers) who state this is the worst UWA ever made. I couldn\'t disagree more. Apparently, they have bad samples (or extremely poor skills?)
Please feel free to contribute your images, etc.
I\'ll begin showing why I love this lens so much. A good copy should perform like this.
f11 on 5D:
100% from bottom corners, centre, top corners:
No filter was used. This is just how sky looks through this lens.
Here is one wide open on 5D:
100% centre:
Another wide open on 5D:
100%:
Back to f11, on 5D as usual:
100%, bottom corners and centre:
I have lots more, if anyone cares to see them, but I\'d rather see other owners\' samples.
For lovers, skeptics, and everyone else in between, here is the Tamron SP 17/3.5 thread.
For some reason this lens has been the centre of ongoing controversy. This is due to sample variation, in my opinion. Apparently there are some people (not necessarily FMers) who state this is the worst UWA ever made. I couldn\'t disagree more. Apparently, they have bad samples (or extremely poor skills?)
Please feel free to contribute your opinions, images, etc.
I\'ll begin showing why I love this lens so much. A good copy should perform like this.
f11 on 5D:
100% from bottom corners, centre, top corners:
No filter was used. This is just how sky looks through this lens.
Here is one wide open on 5D:
100% centre:
Another wide open on 5D:
100%:
Back to f11, on 5D as usual:
100%, bottom corners and centre:
I have lots more, if anyone cares to see them, but I\'d rather see other owners\' samples.
Aug 16, 2009 at 09:48 PM
Previous versions of cogitech's message #7422093 « The Tamron SP 17/3.5 Thread »
