Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (for Nikon)

I

ian-83

Messages
1,556
Edit My Images
Yes
Is this any good when compared to say a Nikon 16-85? Reviews I have seen rate it well but was wondering if anyone had one and pics taken with it?
 
I have had both of these lenses and they are both good. Optically there is not a lot in it although the Nikon does have a lot of barrel distortion at the wide end. I would say the Nikon focuses faster. The Tamron's real strength though is the constant f2.8 and the fact that it is quiet sharp wide open.

If you photograph things in good light (outdoors) then I would go for the Nikon if you photography people or moving subjects in poor light (indoors) then the Tamron is the better choice.

I swapped from the Nikon to the Tamron and was happy with the choice until I went full frame.
 
Most of the time I will be shooting outdoors mainly landscape and cars. Looking for an upgrade over the kit lens and something I can use square filters on without the lens front rotating like the kit lens does.
 
CaptainPenguin said:
As a Canon user I cant compare it with the nikon lens but I used the 17-50 in anger for the first time yesterday and am delighted with the shots,they are the latest on my Flickr at the severn valley railway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/captainpenguin/
Click to expand...

Just had a look at your pics they seem very sharp images. Think the difference of about £160 in price might persuade me as well over the Nikon lens. Is yours the regular version or hte VC version?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top