Tamron SP 17-50 2.8 VS nikon 18-55 2.8
- Thread starter hellogreg
- Start date
Quick answer is don't bother. The tamron is as sharp as Nikon and has very controllable distortion. The IQ is of very high standard also. Nikon will have advantages such as af-s motor, and better IQ and flare control. All of which amounts to very little in real world photography.
Nikon being almost 3-4 times more expensive than tamron and also the same margin for weight makes the tamron superior in every way other than the fact that you have gold letter saying tamron instead of Nikon.
Nikon being almost 3-4 times more expensive than tamron and also the same margin for weight makes the tamron superior in every way other than the fact that you have gold letter saying tamron instead of Nikon.
- Messages
- 5,635
- Name
- Shaheed
- Edit My Images
- No
You'd be better off spending the three to four hundred pounds it would cost to upgrade on something that will make a more tangible difference to your photos - different lens (85 f1.8, nikkor 70-300 afs) or lighting (speedlight/studio head) or even a photographic trip away.
The nikon is better built, a pro quality lens, but I never saw enough of a difference to warrant the upgrade.
S
The nikon is better built, a pro quality lens, but I never saw enough of a difference to warrant the upgrade.
S
- Messages
- 3,194
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
I've had both. The Nikon never missed focus and never hunted, the Tamron sometimes did, the Nikon af'd instantly too, the Tamron was still fast but not as fast. If that isn't important then no real need to change.
Ido Scharf
Junior Member
- Messages
- 78
- Name
- Ido
- Edit My Images
- No
Why? Does anything bother you with the Tamron, other than that badge that says Tamron instead of Nikon?
happygolucky
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,101
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
I loved my Tamron until it was stolen. Mine was a very sharp copy.
