Need quick , unbiased opinions. Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, yay or nay?

Thecageyone

Bear in mind, This would be a big purchase for me. And I need a nice walk about lens for city shots and some indoor too, as we're of to the states end of next week for a month.

All I have atm is the 50mm f/1.8 and a big heavy manual zoom which I'm not going to carry with, as it takes up 1kg and it kills me to use.

I'm torn because I'd love some zoom, and I could buy a cheap 18-200 non Vr lens probably, but the IQ is never going to be as good and I'd only then have the 50mm option for indoor shooting [planning on documenting our daughter's progress in the hospital too]

Anyone got this Tamron? Would you highly rate it? Any distortion at the wide end? I know I'll want lot of wide shots of the City and get in some buildings etc ..

No VR but 17-50 it isn't a necessity is it?

The price is €235 and I'd have to travel to Dublin to collect, so €250 to me altogether inc the bus fare [I don't drive]

Thanks in advance.

PaulieC

why not wait and get it in the US when you're there? or in the airport dixons on the way over

Thecageyone

Much cheaper? I think they're around €400 new, the one I'm looking at is used.

Promac

It's got good reviews on warehouse-express:

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-tamron-17-50mm-f2-8-xr-di-ii-ld-asp-if-lens-nikon-fit/p1013811

Sounds like a goer.

Thecageyone

Looks like what I need alright. I came across a few negative reviews which is why I asked in here alongside.

But I've just spotted a nice VR zoom for around the same price in Best buy, which is right by the hospital we'll be in every day. The new 55-300 Nikkor VR, that's a lovely range, but I'd still have no wide. Decisions ..

melekalikimaka

for hospital rooms, a wide angle would be better, 50mm is a bit tight i agree. tamron are ok, pretty good rep, you can fork out for the canon and feel its worth every penny, and then again you can get the tamron and never have any issues and love it too... until you use the canon :-). id go it, just check it focuses problem free etc if you can

zerohamster

Just a word of warning, if your body is full frame it will vignette.

Thecageyone

No it's DX format, a humble D200. I don't use Canon Met, but I know what you mean. The Nikon equivalant of this Tamron is the very pricey Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 which is over a grand! I have read somewhere that there's little between them IQ-wise, but on other sites I've read different.

I think wide is wiser for this trip alright, can always get a cheap zoom later. I do find whenever I have a 70-300 zoom, I've had a few in the past, that I don't actually use the longer end all that often.

I could wait and see what's on offer when we get there but I'd miss the journey pics, on the plane, in the airport etc .. though the 50mm would be alright for that purpose.

I might just go for this one, take the chance. If anyone is familiar with this particular lens, what should I look for when I test it? Any known issues?

zerohamster

Id say look for sharpness issues...Ive heard of a few including one I owned (canon) that were quite soft.
check build quality too, japanese made ones are supposed to be better made (the sharper ones) but no way of telling unless you test each lens.

one thing I would say is they have quite fast autofocus which is nice, slightly noisey but nothing to worry about. the focus ring spins whilst autofocusing too so you cant hold it like a full time manual lens.

Id recommend it.

Balfey1972

Cagey,

I have one and you are more than welcome to take it for a week and give it a try.
Great walk about lens.

D.

Thecageyone

Thanks for the tip zerohamster. That's very generous Balfey, cheers. But I'll be gone away for a month next week, wouldn't have time to return it I think I'll just take the chance, awaiting the seller to confirm a meet to view it. I hope all goes well, I've not had any problems to date buying on adverts so fingers crossed.

You see user reviews for these things on various sites and can't trust them. One site it's all 5 stars, on other you see the odd 2-3 star ratings appear and the reasonings are not very solid [seen one user review that only gave it one star but his gripe seemed more to do with Tamron's customer service, hardly the lenses fault!]

Sleepy

Have one on a Canon and it very rarely comes off the camera. Perfect walkaround.

mehfesto

The only reason I didn't buy this lens, was that Sigma had a 24-70mm 2.8 in more or less the same price range and I liked the extra reach over my kit lens.

That said I've read all the reviews and was really having a tough time between the two at the end.

Thecageyone

24-70 would be nice for the trip, but the wider end should be good for street shots

I'm a little excited about getting it now. I haven't had any kind of wide lens for a long time, I borrowed a kit lens from Tinyexplosions [thanks again] but I find kit lenses are a bit crappy on the wider end, other wise I'd just buy the VR version new in Conns.

Sleepy

I looked at the Sigma too and went for the wider end of the 17-50 and reports of higher IQ in the corners on the Tamron. Would love if the lens was a bit on the longer side but can always crop where necessary as I don't print large.

Oh, one thing I did read is to disregard the VR version of the lens - it's not as sharp as the non VR and image stabilisation shouldn't be a huge factor in such a short focal range.

Thecageyone

Anything under 50mm shouldn't need VC/VR really though, should it? I know with the 50mm I can easily hand-hold at 1/30 and get sharp enough shots. The only reason It'd be useful on the kit lens would be because of the narrower apertures. f/2.8 should never require it at those focal lengths.

Good to hear positives on the lens, worrying when you read user reviews like this:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamron-17-50mm-F2-8-Aspherical-Nikon/dp/B000HD19X2

Sleepy

Worrying review alright, does anyone near you have a copy of the lens so you could test it on your D200 to see if the issue with the D300 manifests itself on your body?

Thecageyone

Unfortunately not. The only Dslr owners I know nearby are canon users.

That is the only place I've seen the issue mentioned though, been checking other reviews and they're all positive:

http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/equipment/reviews/lenses/703/1/tamron-17-50mm-f-2-8-xr-di-11-ld-if.html

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/290-tamron-af-17-50mm-f28-sp-xr-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-nikon-test-report--review?start=2

The photozone review was done using a D200, and no mention of anything bar the AF accuracy on it.

[edit] Wrong second link, fixed.

Sleepy

Then, to my mind, it comes down to whether you want the extra reach or the extra width. If 50mm is long enough for your walk-around and you want to be able to go quite wide (it's utterly amazing the difference between 17mm on this and 18mm on the Canon kit lens) go for the Tamron. If you can sacrifice some leeway on the width, go for the Sigma 24 - 70.

Following the 'zoom with your feet' philosophy, I went with the Tamron.

dinneenp

I have a prime (50mm, f1.7) lens and find it too long.
Have been considering the 17-50, 24-75 f2.8 as replacements. I was in Jacobs in London at the weekend and tried them both (briefly). Store keeper said, as many others do, that the extra width is better than the extra length.
the 17-50 is a fair bit smaller as well. That's what I'd get/will get (hopefully).

Ideally I'd like to keep the prime (great for low light) AND get the constant aperture zoom but need to sell one to help finance the other....

Thecageyone

I had considered selling my 50mm to fund it too, but managed to scrape the cash together so I can keep it. That's my portrait lens and I love it. If it turned out that the 17-50 was as sharp at 50mm I might consider offing it to go towards a zoom [eyeing up that Nikkor 55-300 VR for that purpose at a later date, maybe a Christmas pressie for myself ]

I'm meeting the seller tomorrow, subject to inspection, all going well, i should be able to tell you how I find the lens tomorrow evening.

Sleepy

It's a great lens for the price range and pretty sharp but it's still a zoom so it's never going to beat a faster prime as a portrait lens.

smelltheglove

I use this lens 99% of the time and I love it. Auto focus is fast and spot on. Does everything it says on the tin, could be a bit sharper but I always sharpen in pp anyway so nothing to worry about there at all. The majority of my shots online are taken with this, unfortunately you cant check the site as it is down but my facebook has tonnes of pics taken with it.

Previously I had the sigma, didnt like it, within days I changed to the 24-70 which I bought on adverts, delighted with it, then I received a mail from someone on adverts with the 17-50 asking would I be interested in changing, although I would like a bigger zoom I do need the wider version moreso than the zoom. Honestly though, I raraely change lenses, i use the 17-50 on one body and my second body usually holds the 90mm 2.8, In a wedding of 500 shots I might only take 50 with the second camera the rest with the main using the tamron.

Thecageyone

Cheers, you've had it on the D200? without issue?

I'm always really wary when buying used lenses, no matter how much research I do. As to me, it's a lot of money and I'm terrified I'll be left with a dud! Hard enough convince the missus I NEED these things

The seller has admitted that the front filter ring came loose once but he fixed it himself. There's honesty for ya! I've looked that up and it seems it a very common problem with this particular lens and an easy fix with a small screw driver. There's even youtube clips of people doing the job, takes about 2 minutes.

I don't mind that as he also insists there is zero other problems, he's used it on a D300 and it looks from the picture that it's in perfect condition.

smelltheglove

I only ever used the d200 in the market with the tamron on it, works perfect, heres one for ya

Thecageyone

Good to know that guy moaning on Amazon must have simply gotten a dud, which can happen with any make or model.

This is basically it, though this guy shows the Canon version, same thing just different mount.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE4-tuHaYyU

I think it's a nice looking lens, nice and neat. I hate the look of kit lenses in general, and this doesn't look like one thankfully.

Sleepy

it's certainly a lot bigger than the Canon Kit lens!

Thecageyone

Shouldn't be a problem for me weight wise, it's just under half a kilo, nice and weighty without being a burden. The zoom I have is just shy of a Kilo and full manual. That thing kills me to use for more than an hour. It's a constant 2-hand-job ... easy now :P having a duffed back is one reason I won't be in a hurry to go full frame any time soon. Couple of kilos around my neck and it feels like my spine is going to split.

Thecageyone

Bought this today. Lovely lens, nicely built. I don't know why so many reviews say it's loud when focusing, the Nikkor 50mm is at least twice as noisey! And seems to focus slower. I've yet to give it a good workout but from what I did shoot today, seems nice to handle, had no hunting issues even when shooting flying gulls along the quays in grim weather. Very pleased

Thanks for all the advice on it.

Borderfox

Good stuff, nice piece of glass and perfect time of year to make the most of it

Thecageyone

I can't wait to give it a proper testing in Saint Louis Not even sure what the landscape is like over there [been on Google street view and it all seems very flat], but I think we're arriving right in the middle of storm season there :eek: should make for some nice images

There is one thing though, maybe someone who uses this lens a lot can tell me if it's an issue with them all? When focusing, aside from the usual light focus whirring noise, there's an odd clicking, I can't explain it but it's there. It sounds like the lens is getting stuck for a split second, but it isn't actually sticking. It's a quick 'click, click' and then it's gone.

dinneenp

Wondering if I'll miss my 50mm f1.7 if I replace it with this? Answer is probably yes bit think Im going to sell my 50mm anyway yo help finance the 17-50mm

Thecageyone

I need to pit it side by side Vs the 50mm later. Same shutter speed, aperture, on the tripod, same subject/lighting etc .. before I could say how it stacks up.

I have a feeling this lens will stay on cam for almost everything bar when I need some reach though. but I'll probably hang on to my 50mm for portrait specific shoots. As It will no doubt be that bit sharper.

I wanted a 24mm and/or 35mm for a while now but held back on buying either because of the price, and I would just back up with the 50mm instead. Now I have all 3 covered in one, plus the wider end again. Changing between a few primes would be a major pain in the rear! And this way you save a bundle. It doesn't have to be as sharp as the primes, just close enough, we all process our best shots anyhow.

Here's some testers, un-edited [just passed through Lightroom, so whatever the default setting is through there] nothing exciting, just took the cam for a walk to the shop as it was bright and sunny out. Harsh light is always a good tester.

Some light vignetting at 17mm, but nothing severe distortion at this orientation is mild, at least.

Exposure: 1/160
F-Number: f6.3
Focal Length: 17 mm



View 'huge' on pix for a better idea on the clarity/contrast.

Exposure: 1/250
F-Number: f5
Focal Length: 26 mm



No obvious distortion, vignetting cleaner, and I think It would be far less obvious if I'd used a slower shutter speed ... but y'know, I was hungry and had just bought eggs.

DOF tester @ f/2.8

Exposure:1/800
F-Number f2.8
Focal Length: 17 mm



Vignetting obvious, but distortion not so.

These are un-cropped, un-edited, RAW files straight converted to Jpeg via LR3.

Will give the 50mm end of it a test later.

Borderfox

Clicking noise could be the motor just changing direction, get a Polariser for it too

Thecageyone

I'd say you're right, so long as it's not just an issue with my copy I'm fine with it.

I might well pick up a polariser when we're over there, sweet that the front element doesn't spin when focusing I think every other zoom I've had did.

Borderfox

77mm ones go from €50 up here

Thecageyone

The one I have is 62mm, it's the non-VC version. What's the advantage of a polarizer over say, an ND grad?

smelltheglove

In all honesty I have both a polariser and an nd4 for mine. The oddtime on an extremely sunny day I will use the nd especially if I have a bride in a white shiny satin gown but other than that I dont use them. The polariser will increase your colour saturation and contrast. I actually do this as standard in my post processing so my €65 polariser was used once:o

The vignetting can show when wide open, I notice if I am photographing someone in a crowd that if there is a face in the corner there will be a bit of distortion, mostly so in the top corners I notice it but generally I crop down ever so slightly anyway. Can't say I have noticed a clicking sound, I have the camera beside me so I have tested it there and cant notice anything other than the usual as per other lenses.

Promac

Looks like a goer KG.

The polariser helps remove glare from sunlight and will give you better looking blue skies and reflective surfaces.


http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Polarisers--a-guide-to-using-polarising-filters-4757

Thecageyone

Hmmm, that's a bit of a worry on the clicking front then. It hasn't lodged or anything, but again, just now, I've noticed it does a kind of stuttering sound when focusing then a light click. Hopefully it's nothing.

Light vignetting at it's widest angle doesn't concern me either, I think it's standard for this focal range? I tend to crop a lot too, as in often, not huge crops Usually a simple straightening job if I've taken shots hand held out doors, which crops out the corners at least once straightened up.

Tried out some shots of the kids with the flash gun, between f/4 - f/8, looks sharp as the 50mm to my eyes in that range. Looks like they'll require very little post-sharpening.

I also like to bump contrast in PP, and the D200 is already nice and contrasty straight off cam. Might not need the polarizer? Another cheap ND4 it is [have a couple for the 50mm]


Oh, another thing I was testing for back there, CA - and i've so far not noticed any, at least very noticeable or interfering. This pleases me. I had a 75-300 tamron zoom in the past and it was horrific for CA, purple fringing, ghosting ... you name it, especially on the longer end. maybe it's more a telephoto issue in general?

I really detest a lens that gives obvious purple fringing.

Borderfox

You wont get the same effect as a polariser in photoshop.

Thecageyone

Do they really make much difference though? I mean, if you expose the sky pretty good, what will a polarizer do to improve it. They seem a bit pricey, I'd want some good improvement for the price.

Promac

You get a noticeable improvement in the colour of the sky on a sunny day. You can get rid of a lot of reflections on the surface of water or just light bouncing off a surface you want to photograph. If you're strapped it's not a necessity but it's nice to have.

Thecageyone

I'll definitely have a look for them in Saint Louis, not sure what camera shops they have there, i know they do have a bestbuy though.

traume

I have VR version and bought in Conns camera store.
It is a little bit soft wide open, but once you stop it down, eg picture above is taken at f8. It has just excellent sharpness. It can't beat primes, but for the money it is very good.

Picture is taken at 17mm, f8, 1/250 ISO200, so you can see distortions by yourself (I can't see ).

Thecageyone

beautiful picture traume

I think most lenses are at their best stopped down a bit.

Using bounced flash along with this lens stopped down to f/5.6 gives very sharp results, took this one today with it:




Exposure: 0.01 sec (1/100)
F-Number: f5.6
Focal Length: 38 mm

Processed, obviously, but it didn't take much sharpening, it was mostly the black levels and contrast I bumped. And the usual bits and bobs I do to my portraits. Every bit as good as the results I normally get from the 50mm

Sleepy

Good to see your so happy with the lens Thecageyone, lovely portrait in your last post!

Thecageyone

Thanks for that Happy so far, early days but, I've not been as comfortable or happy with a lens since the minolta 50mm f/1.7 when I was on sony, a beaut of a lens - even better than the Nikkor I have to say. Mainly because it was like a baby tank, all steel, mount an' all. Plus it produced some beautiful sharpness + SDOF when you asked it to.

Let this Tamron be my Nikon baby please!

the_monkey

That Tamron lens is amazing, approaches L glass quality .

margarite

Sleepy wrote: »

Have one on a Canon and it very rarely comes off the camera. Perfect walkaround.

That s great, you really have made me very happy with this advice and its great to know that someone is trying to help, thank again.:)