Tamron 17-50mm f2.8

lolage

lolage

Messages
911
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, looking at getting one of these after doing a bit of reading up on them to replace my kit lens. Just wondering if its much of an upgrade compared to my Nikon 18-55 VR? Also, I've read around and people are recomending the non-vc version; why is this?

Thanks, Ben.
 
Hi Ben

I had the VC version. I have no idea what Tamron did exactly to cock up a good lens, but they ruined their latest incarnation of the 17-50mm 2.8. I bought one and kept it for about a month. The VC version is soft.

I havent used the non VC version, but it's been advised to me that its a better and sharper lens.

Hope that helps

Danny
 
Code:
lolage said:
Hi, looking at getting one of these after doing a bit of reading up on them to replace my kit lens. Just wondering if its much of an upgrade compared to my Nikon 18-55 VR? Also, I've read around and people are recomending the non-vc version; why is this?

Thanks, Ben.
Click to expand...

I cant comment on the VC version but as you said the general opinion is they messed up with that one. I have the non VC and love it, its the lens that lives on the front on my D90 most of the time.

Check out the Flickr group, plenty examples on there :thumbs:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/tamron17-50mm/
 
Mr Mike said:
Code:

I cant comment on the VC version but as you said the general opinion is they messed up with that one. I have the non VC and love it, its the lens that lives on the front on my D90 most of the time.

Check out the Flickr group, plenty examples on there :thumbs:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/tamron17-50mm/
Click to expand...

Cool, will take a look.

Would you say the tamron is a better lens despite the NIKON having VR and the tamron not?
 
the tamron will be the better choice in low light . have you considered the 35mm 1.8g. would give you around 50mm on the d3100 , fantastic walk around lens and you,ll love it in low light
 
lolage said:
Cool, will take a look.

Would you say the tamron is a better lens despite the NIKON having VR and the tamron not?
Click to expand...

I wouldnt like to say for sure, of course the big question is do you really need VR at such short focal lengths? I had 18-55 non vr kit lens on my d40 then when i upgraded to d90 i bought it body only and of course went for the Tamron. I wanted a f2.8 zoom and this fitted my requirements, the nikon i would imagine is slower AF and not so great in low light especailly at the higher focal lengths, least the tamron is constant thoughout.

Oh comparing the 18-55 non vc and tamron, there is NO contest, the Tamron is in a different league altogether.

Good luck with your choice
 
The Tamron 17-50 non VC will be much MUCH better than the 18-55 kit lens. There are many factors to lens performance, and kit lenses as a rule of thumb, tend to be master of none, and are not intended to be.

Another vote here for the 35mm 1.8 DX. Fantastic little lens. Unless you need wider of course
 
Mahoneyd187 said:
The Tamron 17-50 non VC will be much MUCH better than the 18-55 kit lens. There are many factors to lens performance, and kit lenses as a rule of thumb, tend to be master of none, and are not intended to be.

Another vote here for the 35mm 1.8 DX. Fantastic little lens. Unless you need wider of course
Click to expand...

Was looking at the 35mm 1.8 but i mainly shoot landscape and have been told its not a great landscape lens due to its lack of focal range??
 
lolage said:
Was looking at the 35mm 1.8 but i mainly shoot landscape and have been told its not a great landscape lens due to its lack of focal range??
Click to expand...

In that case just buy the tokina 11-16mm and the nikon 35mm and that'll be you sorted:thumbs:
 
mjjiva said:
In that case just buy the tokina 11-16mm and the nikon 35mm and that'll be you sorted:thumbs:
Click to expand...
Ah yeah, never thought of that! Only problem with the tokina is that it doesnt have the inbuilt motors so won't autofocus on my d3100!

Mr Mike said:
Looking for wide on a budget then I highly recommend the Sigma 10-20 non VC, its an awesome lens for the money. This is my favourite most used lens, i use it for nearly every landscape i shoot :thumbs:
Click to expand...
The sigma does autofocus though! Wanted one of these for a while...
 
lolage said:
Was looking at the 35mm 1.8 but i mainly shoot landscape and have been told its not a great landscape lens due to its lack of focal range??
Click to expand...

My advice on that front, would be to look through your shots and examine the exif data to see what focal length you shoot with most regularly with on your 18-55. If it varies alot, get a 17-50, if it's in the middle there of there abouts, get a 35m 1.8, if you're stuck at 18mm all the time, get a tokina 11-16 (awesome lens) or the sigma 10-20, if you're towards the longer end like 45-55mm mostly, then buy a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8.

All good budget buys imo :thumbs:
 
Mahoneyd187 said:
My advice on that front, would be to look through your shots and examine the exif data to see what focal length you shoot with most regularly with on your 18-55. If it varies alot, get a 17-50, if it's in the middle there of there abouts, get a 35m 1.8, if you're stuck at 18mm all the time, get a tokina 11-16 (awesome lens) or the sigma 10-20, if you're towards the longer end like 45-55mm mostly, then buy a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8.

All good budget buys imo :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Theres quite alot at 18/35/55. I'm thinking maybe a Sigma 10-20mm & Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 may be a good combo??
 
lolage said:
Theres quite alot at 18/35/55. I'm thinking maybe a Sigma 10-20mm & Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 may be a good combo??
Click to expand...

Yeah sure if you want to stick with zooms :)

I'd get a wide angle zoom, 35 1.8, and 50mm 1.8 primes, but I've got a prime fetish and I'm not afraid to admit it!! :wave:
 
Mahoneyd187 said:
Yeah sure if you want to stick with zooms :)

I'd get a wide angle zoom, 35 1.8, and 50mm 1.8 primes, but I've got a prime fetish and I'm not afraid to admit it!! :wave:
Click to expand...

haha fair enough.

Although I heard that there isnt a 50mm 1.8 prime which will autofocus on my d3100?
 
lolage said:
Ah yeah, never thought of that! Only problem with the tokina is that it doesnt have the inbuilt motors so won't autofocus on my d3100!


The sigma does autofocus though! Wanted one of these for a while...
Click to expand...
In that case change your camera :lol:
 
Was in a similar position Ben, upgrading from my 18-70mm

I had shortlisted the tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC , Nikon 16-85 f3.5-4.5, and the Nikon 35-70 f2.8

I spent an hour with all 3 after leaving a bit of insurance with the owner in and around london. I us a d300

After much deliberation and pixel peeping in the Apple store on their imacs lol - I chose the tamron 17-50 f2.8

The 35-70 proved to be an awkward focal length, was built like a tank and was quite sharp.

The 16-85 - had the best all round package. The VR is a good feature especially at the long end. From around 60mm - I thought the sharpness level dropped noticeabley - even wen stopped down.

I chose the 17-50 as the bokeh is wonderful, has a constant 2.8 has as good a build quality as the 16-85, if ot slightly better. Also, although you drop 1mm at the wide end and 35 at the other - the focal length it covers is sharp all the way through at all apertures. The VC when on makes a noticeable whirling sound, but after 10 minutes you forget it exists - the VC makes an AMAZING difference - I was hand holding shots at a 1/3 of a second and they were TACK sharp. It's as sharp if not sharper than my 50mm f1.8 and my 135mm f2.8 primes.

I have only had the lens for hours but I am in love!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top