PDA

View Full Version : Tamron 17-50 2.8 review

05Xrunner
21st of May 2006 (Sun), 22:15
I dont know if anyone saw this
A review over at Photozone
sorry if I reposted it
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1750_28/index.htm
jesusdelallata
22nd of May 2006 (Mon), 19:23
Nice. Now I might have to buy one. This sucks.
piku
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 03:25
I'm w/ you on that brotha =) But should we wait for the Tokina 16-50? ....
jesusdelallata
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 07:35
I'm w/ you on that brotha =) But should we wait for the Tokina 16-50? ....


I think so. Eventurally all of the lenses in this category will be tested head-to-head. I can't wait to see the results.

Recently Popular Photography had a comparison on the ultra wides (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina) so hopefully in the near future they'll do the same for the 16/17/18 - 50mm f2.8 category. :D
vjack
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 11:44
Looks like a good review, but I think I'll wait for some head-to-head tests. It will be interesting to see how this compares with Sigma's 17-70 and 18-50.
aRJun
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 12:36
I think so. Eventurally all of the lenses in this category will be tested head-to-head. I can't wait to see the results.

Recently Popular Photography had a comparison on the ultra wides (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina) so hopefully in the near future they'll do the same for the 16/17/18 - 50mm f2.8 category. :D

Would you remember which issue had this review? I'm looking to buy an UWA. Thanks.
aRJun
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 13:53
Would you remember which issue had this review? I'm looking to buy an UWA. Thanks.

Got it..it was the April issue.

Does anyone have sample photos (other than the ones in the review) of the 17-50?
PhilipJohnBasile
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 15:26
This one is neck in neck with canon's and beats it in some tests.. really interesting..
PhilipJohnBasile
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 17:37
anyone compare the tamron with the canon yet?
jesusdelallata
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 19:20
I just stopped by my Local Pro Camera store here in Houston and they have two in stock. It's about the same look and feel of the 28-75mm, but it seems a little bit smaller. It's a nice lens. It focused fast and felt solid. No...it's not "L" build, but those who have the Tamron 28-75mm know what I mean. I like it. I resisted the temptation to walk out with one. I'm going to wait a little more.

Now here's the interesting part. The price was $439.00, which is even less than ordering it online. I'm not sure if they miss-priced it, but that's a good deal.
ddelallata
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 20:11
I just stopped by my Local Pro Camera store here in Houston and they have two in stock. It's about the same look and feel of the 28-75mm, but it seems a little bit smaller. It's a nice lens. It focused fast and felt solid. No...it's not "L" build, but those who have the Tamron 28-75mm know what I mean. I like it. I resisted the temptation to walk out with one. I'm going to wait a little more.

Now here's the interesting part. The price was $439.00, which is even less than ordering it online. I'm not sure if they miss-priced it, but that's a good deal.

You should have just bought the lens... Oh well, I guess you are not the one with the brains in the family :)
aparmley
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 20:14
You should have just bought the lens... Oh well, I guess you are not the one with the brains in the family :)

LMAO
PhilipJohnBasile
23rd of May 2006 (Tue), 22:12
whats the comparisions with the sigma and the canon?
Andy_T
24th of May 2006 (Wed), 03:33
whats the comparisions with the sigma and the canon?

Well, Photozone.de has tests for the 16-35/2.8, 17-40/4.0, EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS, Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX (And EF-S 18-55) that are all done with the same procedure and to the same specifications.

Why don't you just compare those reviews for a first impression?

Best regards,
Andy
tombryan
24th of May 2006 (Wed), 05:42
Spoke with a sales rep who has tested the lens at Tallyn's www.tallyns.com and he saved the images for me. What I saw looked really really good. Nice and sharp. He told me he was really impressed with it and I know for a fact he's not a big Tamron fan. So that's saying alot to me. The images said more though. That lens will be on my camera soon !
Master-9
24th of May 2006 (Wed), 06:40
This looks good...
PhilipJohnBasile
24th of May 2006 (Wed), 07:03
Well, Photozone.de has tests for the 16-35/2.8, 17-40/4.0, EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS, Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX (And EF-S 18-55) that are all done with the same procedure and to the same specifications.

Why don't you just compare those reviews for a first impression?

Best regards,
Andy'

The camera could be as sharp as a tact but have horrible colour. Real life photos are best.
Andy_T
24th of May 2006 (Wed), 07:35
'

The camera could be as sharp as a tact but have horrible colour. Real life photos are best.

Do check out the reviews.
There are some photos included, don't know whether they meet your 'real life' criteria.
BTW, colour is one thing you can change in PP.

Best regards,
Andy
jeronimo
24th of May 2006 (Wed), 07:36
here are some comparison shots with the 18-55 kitlens
http://hem.bredband.net/b288577/tamron1750/tamron1750vscanon1855.htm
Photo's on the botom of the page show a whole bunch of CA/Purple friging. I realy dislike it :(


In the upper right corner a link to some comparion with the canon 17-40.
PhilipJohnBasile
24th of May 2006 (Wed), 08:55
yikes... so the tamron is sharp as a tact but is the big purple nurple...
Tee Why
24th of May 2006 (Wed), 23:44
anyone compare the tamron with the canon yet?
Photozone.de has reviewed both of them, but not together, but their testing method is standardized and you can compare the numbers anyway.

To sum it up, looks like Canon has less CA at f2.8 and a bit sharper at f2.8 but I don't think the diff is that hugh as both rate at excellent sharpness (center) wide open for the most part. Personally, I think the biggest thing is the CA, IS, and the price.
jesusdelallata
25th of May 2006 (Thu), 07:05
You should have just bought the lens... Oh well, I guess you are not the one with the brains in the family :)


Your upcoming graduation from Medical School is going to beat my MBA, Dr. David.

At your graduation I'll be taking pics...it just won't be with the Tamron 17-50 :cry:

Maybe as a doctor you can buy me one :D
vjack
25th of May 2006 (Thu), 07:40
I realize that this is an f/2.8 lens, but does it also make sense to compare it with the 17-40L rather than just the 17-55 IS? I would think this might be a great alternative to the 17-40.
timmyb
25th of May 2006 (Thu), 10:48
Just been around the block with it for the first time today.Very impressed with it.CA doesn't appear to be a major problem in the real world.Distortion at 17mm noticable but within reason,focussing is bang on,colours are beautiful,nice bokeh.
I've posted a few snaps here.
http://www.pbase.com/timbateman/tamron_1750_at_28
piku
29th of May 2006 (Mon), 04:23
Okay... well, I guess I really to wait for Tokina's 16-50 just to see its comparison. Anyone got a clue when its dropping in stores?
Diminished29
8th of June 2006 (Thu), 03:46
^^^I heard sometime in September. That was from dpreview unless its changed since then thats when I'd suspect it as they're usually right on the money about things.
Olegis
8th of June 2006 (Thu), 05:43
Just been around the block with it for the first time today.Very impressed with it.CA doesn't appear to be a major problem in the real world.Distortion at 17mm noticable but within reason,focussing is bang on,colours are beautiful,nice bokeh.
I've posted a few snaps here.
http://www.pbase.com/timbateman/tamron_1750_at_28

Timmy, it looks like a very good lens - definitely compared to the 28-75 f/2.8. Thanks for posting these examples.