Tamron 17-50 images
- Thread starter allanm
- Start date
Raymond Lin
I am Groot
- Messages
- 10,562
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
Straight out of the camera, only resized in photoshop with no PP.
Now that's a real Cutie! LoLnot a flower, and taken with a Canon, but some of my close ups of a moving target with the Tamron 17-50
Click for more
aberal
lens lens lens (or Lens)
- Messages
- 1,767
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Didn't expect you to say anything else - but I won't be swapping my Nikkor for a Tamron at any price.
- Messages
- 1,442
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Puddleduck is there anyway round improving iQ due to the AA filter apart from using USM in photoshop?
- Messages
- 252
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Lets look at it another way, and leave AWP partly happy.
You will not go wrong with either lens image quality wise.
Tamron +
Size
Under half the price of the Nikon
Tamron -
If it's made in China, not Japan you need to test it before buying due to legacy QA issues there.
Nikon+
Badge
Bomb proof build quality
Nikon-
Cost
Size compared to rivals
The question - if you'r spending that much, shouldn't you go for the 24-70 f2.8, leaving yourself the chance of the full frame 14-24 f2.8 as well at a later stage.
You will not go wrong with either lens image quality wise.
Tamron +
Size
Under half the price of the Nikon
Tamron -
If it's made in China, not Japan you need to test it before buying due to legacy QA issues there.
Nikon+
Badge
Bomb proof build quality
Nikon-
Cost
Size compared to rivals
The question - if you'r spending that much, shouldn't you go for the 24-70 f2.8, leaving yourself the chance of the full frame 14-24 f2.8 as well at a later stage.
Just a warning that the Tamron's AF motor is considered to be one of the loudest around. I certainly couldn't purchase the lens having heard one unfortunately so I went for the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 instead.
To the user above "AWP", you are embarrassing yourself with such comments. Don't put down a lens when you haven't any experience with it. I'm going to assume from your blunt snobbish remarks that you have none with this lens and are merely brand scaremongering based on your logical opinion of anything non Nikon. If you have experience with one then I take the above back, but would insist you must have had a bad copy as this lens is considered to give massive bang per buck with very good image quality even wide open.
To the user above "AWP", you are embarrassing yourself with such comments. Don't put down a lens when you haven't any experience with it. I'm going to assume from your blunt snobbish remarks that you have none with this lens and are merely brand scaremongering based on your logical opinion of anything non Nikon. If you have experience with one then I take the above back, but would insist you must have had a bad copy as this lens is considered to give massive bang per buck with very good image quality even wide open.
- Messages
- 10,870
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
it aint that loud, and I'm 99% sure the canon one is better than my tamron so I guess the nikon would be too, more cash more quality. Yeah the tammy is great bang for buck but don't get personal with members
I'm not sure what you mean on both counts there. Are you suggesting the Canon 17-55mm IS f/2.8 is better than the Tamron equivalent? I would expect so at 3 times the price
It is better. Many reviews state this. As for getting personal with members, I didn't think I did.As for the AF motor, there has been some dispute over whether it is that loud or not. obviously it is subjective but also there appear to be some lenses made in Taiwan and some Japan. Japan have been said to have a less noisy motor. Anyway, the one I heard in a shop was ridiculous and I could never use it without being embarrassed of the noise for me personally.
- Messages
- 3,751
- Name
- urrrm.... Matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
this thread interests me because I have a tamron 17-50 but might upgrade to the canon 17-55 IS
it's supposed to be pin sharp.
now my tamron is pin sharp and amazing...at times, otherwise it's just pretty damn good
also I've missed the odd 'critical' shot with the tamron
will give it a good work out at the next fight gig on a weeks time.
now however, tamron have released the 17-50 VR.....nikon first, then canon maybe later in the year.....
it's all to play for, I will probs hire a 17-55 IS from LFH in november (I have a wedding to go to) and to a compare for my own benefit before parting with oodles of cash!
it's supposed to be pin sharp.
now my tamron is pin sharp and amazing...at times, otherwise it's just pretty damn good
also I've missed the odd 'critical' shot with the tamron
will give it a good work out at the next fight gig on a weeks time.
now however, tamron have released the 17-50 VR.....nikon first, then canon maybe later in the year.....
it's all to play for, I will probs hire a 17-55 IS from LFH in november (I have a wedding to go to) and to a compare for my own benefit before parting with oodles of cash!
Not wishing to divert this thread too much from the original question, but I recently and directly compared the Tamron 17-50 with the Canon 17-55 IS.
The Tamron was very close to the Canon in terms of IQ, but I got more 'keepers' with the Canon (due to f2.8 and IS). The new Tamropn will be an interesting proposition...
