Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

[DrMitch]

A quick snapshot of my son with the Tammy 2.8 - wide open handheld.

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj195/dr_mitch/IMG_2768.jpg

[ESMcBlurM3]

Here's one from tonight:

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb35/emcbane/IMG_4986.jpg

Love this lens!

edit: and another

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb35/emcbane/IMG_4984.jpg

[Daniel2000]

2 I took at the family reunion

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/portraits/IMG_9568b.jpg

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/portraits/IMG_9686.jpg

[SMP_Homer]

2 I took at the family reunion

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/portraits/IMG_9568b.jpg



Awesome shirt! I'm having a hard time finding Habs clothing for my kids in southwestern Ontario. I was in the Granby area last week, and couldn't find anything there either, I should have tried before xmas!

[DrMitch]

Awesome shirt! I'm having a hard time finding Habs clothing for my kids in southwestern Ontario. I was in the Granby area last week, and couldn't find anything there either, I should have tried before xmas!

Well, he is in Quebec. I think it's (or at least should be) manadatory clothing for ALL kids there!! :)
(My family's from Montreal - so it's in my blood!!!)

[SMP_Homer]

Well, he is in Quebec. I think it's (or at least should be) manadatory clothing for ALL kids there!! :)
(My family's from Montreal - so it's in my blood!!!)

I was born and raised in Granby, and I remember so many pieces of clothing with the CH on them... so many tuques... socks... shirts... and bedsheets... trying to do the same for my kids, and I'm having a hard time!

[spiiz]

New to photography
17-50 is my first lens hehe
Here are some of my favorite shots, EXIF still intact (check flickr)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/3167267706_efedd68412.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/spiiz/3167267706/) http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1103/3166872159_10084911f6.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/spiiz/3166872159/) http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3122/3167508740_e57c1fbd1e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/spiiz/3167508740/)

:cool:

[Daniel2000]

welcome on POTN
and nice pics

[cherrymoon]

Welcome here.

Very nice style. I love the taxi one. Wich PP did you apply ?

[yogiboy]

super cropped :). no sharpening done.
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/1381/122808experiment001yr1.jpg (http://img184.imageshack.us/my.php?image=122808experiment001yr1.jpg)
iso 100 f/9.0 50mm 1/200sec handheld

[spiiz]

thanks for the welcomes

Very nice style. I love the taxi one. Wich PP did you apply ?

i just play with the adjustement layers in photoshop
basically, there's:
- increase contrast
- vignette achieved with a radial gradient, decrease opacity for more subtle effect
- curves
- sepia saturation layer preset in photoshop (using CS4 here) and change opacity to like 20-40%

im pretty sure there's a preset somewhere to achieve that effect... widely used in flickr
you could try a LOMO preset, but instead of that cyan/yellow (green) tint, try a magenta one

edit:

BTW, i would use F/11 (sharpest) for shots requiring a wide DoF such as landscapes and maybe F/5.6 for general..
for easy "macros" try to zoom all the way in to 50mm and set to F/2.8 and go as close to the subject as you can focus, snap, voilà!

[shaftmaster]

Just ordered a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 from B&H for $395 and can't wait to get it! Seems like a great lens for the price, and I'm not ready to spend $900 on the Canon 17-55 IS, though IS would be nice to have.

[jsteel77]

I just ordered one as well, should be here tomorrow!!!!

[RIgnacio]

I'm picking mine up tomorrow. Driving 1 1/2 hours away but for $300 I figure it's worth it!

[nubee719]

I'm getting mine in a couple days as well and can't wait. :)

[kmcconn9]

After looking through 1/2 of this thread, I'm not overly impressed with this lens for what i am looking for. 3/4 of the shots in here are at 50mm. I would think you would be further ahead to use a 50 1.4 or 1.8 instead.

I am looking at getting into ultra wide photos and this lens dosent seem to really shine until about 23mm...I could be wrong though as I have tested it myself..

Good price though for what you get, I found one for 300 and its tempting not to buy it just because....

[DrMitch]

After looking through 1/2 of this thread, I'm not overly impressed with this lens for what i am looking for. 3/4 of the shots in here are at 50mm. I would think you would be further ahead to use a 50 1.4 or 1.8 instead.

I am looking at getting into ultra wide photos and this lens dosent seem to really shine until about 23mm...I could be wrong though as I have tested it myself..

Good price though for what you get, I found one for 300 and its tempting not to buy it just because....

If you're looking for ultra-wide, then looking at the 10-20 range of lenses may be a better choice for you...

[Zillon]

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Centralia/Centralia%201-09/cen024.jpg

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Centralia/Centralia%201-09/cen033.jpg

[snowrdr]

After looking through 1/2 of this thread, I'm not overly impressed with this lens for what i am looking for. 3/4 of the shots in here are at 50mm. I would think you would be further ahead to use a 50 1.4 or 1.8 instead.

I am looking at getting into ultra wide photos and this lens dosent seem to really shine until about 23mm...I could be wrong though as I have tested it myself..

Good price though for what you get, I found one for 300 and its tempting not to buy it just because....

Here are a couple shot at 17mm :D

http://www.pbase.com/snowrdr/image/105234351.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/snowrdr/image/106101538/original.jpg

[jimmyfingers]

Rome last year...http://i701.photobucket.com/albums/ww15/jamesrumble/IMG_1158.jpg

[RIgnacio]

Just picked mine up last night and I LOVE IT!!!

332721

County Administration Building, San Diego

[jimmyfingers]

Another from Rome...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3330/3181260665_2e302de206_b.jpg

[Bobster]

i used mine exclusively in a shoot on Friday Afternoon
http://www.pbase.com/bob_hall/image/107966631.jpg

[Daniel2000]

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Centralia/Centralia%201-09/cen033.jpg

What happenned to that road? ???

[Zillon]

What happenned to that road? ???

See my thread here: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=626999

That's one of my shots from Centralia, PA.

[St1ll]

This lens is so sharp..
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/4007/img6737uw6.jpg

And 100% crop from above.
http://img55.imageshack.us/img55/1923/img673722gc4.jpg
Ps= Straight out of the camera, DPP sharpness set to 3 (instead of 5, which is default)...that's all.

[xblindx]

After looking through 1/2 of this thread, I'm not overly impressed with this lens for what i am looking for. 3/4 of the shots in here are at 50mm. I would think you would be further ahead to use a 50 1.4 or 1.8 instead.

I am looking at getting into ultra wide photos and this lens dosent seem to really shine until about 23mm...I could be wrong though as I have tested it myself..

Good price though for what you get, I found one for 300 and its tempting not to buy it just because....


you knw my first lens was 50 mm 1.8 but i came up with many situations where i wanted more wider than 50 mm. and thus after reading and viewing all the pics i went with this lens. the sharpness from 17 to 50 mm is great. and i use it most of the time now.

mine hab no wobbling and the sound it less that the xti shutter sound

im very happy with this lens purchase

[dufrenbk]

Here's some off this thread...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=628817

#1
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4580_1.jpg

#2
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4588.jpg

#3 Note the car... piece of crap, didn't notice it until I got home! Ahhhhhhhh
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4589.jpg

#4
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4590_1.jpg

#5
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4597.jpg

[dufrenbk]

here's some more from another thread...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=627786

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4622_1.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4625_1.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4630_1.jpg

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l201/dufrenbk/Photography/IMG_4631_1.jpg

[ESMcBlurM3]

I love that last shot!

[RIgnacio]

I like #4 great composition!

[drRex]

My contribution, also my first post.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1145/3163405933_f95eeaea61_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dereksamson/3163405933/)

50mm@2.8

[Coppatop85]

Welcome DMS, nice shot!

[bminear]

here is one of my fav's from this lens! i love the sharpness.
f/9
shutter:250
50mm
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3113/3198573117_ca3483609c_b.jpg


and here is a 100% crop of the same image, unsharpened.

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/5623/100bh4.jpg

[bminear]

and here is one more i forgot about. its an hdr, as you can tell

Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 17 mm
ISO Speed: 100
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3042/2860795669_e62faaaec4_b.jpg

[JDMist3hFastar]

and here is one more i forgot about. its an hdr, as you can tell

Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 17 mm
ISO Speed: 100
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3042/2860795669_e62faaaec4_b.jpg

mmmmmmmmm, sell me on this lens you have

[srsuser]

distortion is really noticeable in this shot

[lebthug]

Hi,
I'm considering getting this lens (I plan on trying it out in store tomorrow actually) and I was wondering, does distortion at 17mm affect the ability to merge multiple shots together in PS to get a wider view?
and if yes, does the canon 17-55 IS produce same level of distortion or will it be better for merged shots?

reason I ask is this will be my widest length and I will occasionally need a wider view (small room, etc.), but not often enough to get a 10-22mm. Plus the 2.8 aperture is really interesting for me.

Great thread by the way, I'm new to SLR photography and I just can't get enough of this forum!

Thanks!

[Zillon]

Absolutely not, this was shot with the 17-50 at 17mm and merged together with photomerge in CS3.

3 different exposures.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/NYC/panorama-fin.jpg

[lebthug]

Thanks Zack, didn't know how it would be handled in PS, as the widest lens I currently have is the 28-135IS I got with my 40D.

It's set, I'm out to get a feel of this lens in store, and maybe even buy it there if they agree to price match!

[Zillon]

No problem!

Here's another, shot at 17mm.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/Misc/garagepano002f.jpg

[Daniel2000]

did a merge of 4 on this one, was a little more touchy then just a panorama but it came out ok after a little work
http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/mariage/-Panorama1montagede80138016.jpg

[pridash]

did a merge of 4 on this one, was a little more touchy then just a panorama but it came out ok after a little work
http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/mariage/-Panorama1montagede80138016.jpg

Very impressive!

[JokerGirl]

Took this one this morning of my Harlequin Shrimp.

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s110/JokerGirlsPhotos/Harly.jpg

[lebthug]

Great pics guys. I tried out the lens in store yesterday to get a feel but they wouldn't match the online price, so I ordered it online.

I should have it by Wednesday, can't wait!

[Daniel2000]

Very impressive!

Thanks :)

[keener]

hmm, i've had had this lens over a year and haven't put anything into this thread.. So here are some of my recent snapshots with the 17-50.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3222/3153129310_1cbc1590a6_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3195/3153128494_7f85d41047_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3286/3153127882_e06963be82_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3243/3152292989_ee82773780_o.jpg

[lukeap69]

wow. love the colours of your photos especially the 2nd one.

[Zillon]

Slightly oversaturated for my tastes, #2 isn't bad though.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/Abandoned/divorced.jpg

[kavster]

I found the 17-50 a bit difficult to get many keepers from, mainly because mine would miss-focus.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3100/3196119515_c553b09baf.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3097/2751335706_8907f1e389.jpg

[xblindx]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3259/3219708664_4bf28a53ca_b.jpg



http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3311/3207923495_a6a15ed697_b.jpg

[Zillon]

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/Abandoned/commodore001.jpg

[RIgnacio]

XBLINDX....wow...powerful post...

[Zillon]

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/Objects/failbox001.jpg

[St1ll]

I loved both your shots Zillon...really!

[Zillon]

Thanks! :)

[keener]

Not enough colour saturation for my tastes.. hehe j/k! I love them too, they're great.

[Zillon]

Not enough color? Ok! :P

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/Abandoned/parklocustbw.jpg

[JDMist3hFastar]

need...this...lens!

[Coppatop85]

Zillion, that shoe picture you posted almost looks fake. Did you do some crazy PP or something to that image, or did you just have amazing light?

[Zillon]

Zillion, that shoe picture you posted almost looks fake. Did you do some crazy PP or something to that image, or did you just have amazing light?

Here's what it looked like straight out of the camera. All I did was bump the clarity and contrast a hair, and do a curves adjustment in ACR. Not really too much PP work, IMO.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y99/Zillon2/photography/swooshunedit.jpg

[Davey-boy]

On 50D

[lebthug]

Here's a few of my first pictures with this lens, at the Montreal International Auto Show:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3320/3232392677_1be8c39205.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3509/3233248006_66857d13f0.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3420/3232402889_392d22674c.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3129/3233271878_2ed7a06296.jpg?v=0

So far so good I really like this lens, but it's my first non-IS and I can clearly see the difference when taking pictures!

Also is it normal that it does not auto-focus in Live View mode?

[dufrenbk]

So far so good I really like this lens, but it's my first non-IS and I can clearly see the difference when taking pictures!

Also is it normal that it does not auto-focus in Live View mode?


AF is achievable in live view mode only when u enable it in settings and to AF you have to press the AF-ON button on the camera.

[lebthug]

AF is achievable in live view mode only when u enable it in settings and to AF you have to press the AF-ON button on the camera.

Thanks, that's good to know! I don't recall having to do that with my other lens but then again I had not used live view mode since last summer. I'll give it a try tonight.

[Daniel2000]

great shots ledthug
j'aurais bien aimé y aller aussi mais faute de temps... :(

[lebthug]

Merci! T'en fais pas t'as pas manqué grand chose, ça fallait la peine pour la Skyline et la Lancer 5 portes, le reste c'est pas mal du déjà vu!

[Daniel2000]

ho! et...
Welcome on POTN ;)

[cherrymoon]

...ça Vallait la peine...

;) 8)

[RIgnacio]

NICE shots and even NICER cars!

[RIgnacio]

From a photoshoot I did this weekend. It's no Ferrari but it's still a pretty nice ride....
http://www.iriphoto.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=290&g2_serialNumber=4

[lippstuh]

is that your car? it looks great, any ps?

[RIgnacio]

No, I wish it was mine. No PS. I suck at photoshop.:o

[Sabertooth]

Just got this lens a few weeks ago and was using the kit lens prior to that. I tried it out at my friend's wedding this past weekend. :)

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/BajaChalupa/01new/IMG_3826.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/BajaChalupa/01new/IMG_3877.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/BajaChalupa/01new/IMG_3926.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a190/BajaChalupa/01new/IMG_4145.jpg

[BluewookieJim]

Took just my 20D and this great lens to Central Park about 2 weeks ago. Here are a couple that I liked:

http://photos.kodanja.net/img/v5/p702566905-4.jpg

http://photos.kodanja.net/img/v5/p291506412-4.jpg

The rest of the small gallery can be seen at: http://photos.kodanja.net/centralpark

[JDMist3hFastar]

anybody wanna sell me theirs? I cant find one :(

[Bobster]

did you look?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/423714-REG/Tamron_AF016C700_17_50mm_f_2_8_XR_Di.html

[keener]

hehe, I had my 17-50 posted on my local craigslist for 3 days before I changed my mind and took it down. I can't bring myself to sell this lens.

[srsuser]

anybody wanna sell me theirs? I cant find one :(

Yes you can. They are everywhere.

New or used.

[bminear]

a decent one from the storm tonight

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/9738/02112375assmartobject1pf2.jpg

[packham]

Castlefield
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3360/3286170274_c69fc521ab_o.jpg

[Bobster]

a decent one from the storm tonight

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/9738/02112375assmartobject1pf2.jpg
WOW! that would work so well in HDR!

[aznkidd55]

anybody wanna sell me theirs? I cant find one :(

I'm gonna be selling mine soon, I just bought the 17-40L. pm me if interested

here are my last few shots with this lens. It was good while I had it.



http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3381/3270259007_3884f01935_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3439/3271079470_907222a398_o.jpg

[srsuser]

I have the 18-55 IS w/ my 40D right now. Should I buy this over the Canon 50 f/1.4 prime?

[Bobster]

http://www.pbase.com/bob_hall/image/109143316.jpg

[dingelingyi]

took a friend to the range

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3335/3275049195_c8dd4f1821.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3041/3275043925_efc3013acc.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3488/3275046661_9c887e0ea8.jpg?v=0

[packham]

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg258/packham25/IMG_0890.jpg

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg258/packham25/IMG_1008.jpg

[B.Dylan]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3378/3282302238_13b2976414_b.jpg

[Zillon]

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/Nature/wintercolors.jpg

[Skunkshocker]

Is it very important that a tripod is used with this lens? I am used to shooting handheld with my 18-55MM IS and 55-250MM IS. I am considering buying this lens to replace my 18-55MM IS so that I can take more wider shots and better landscapes and portraits.

Also which would be a better choice?

Tamron 17-50MM or Sigma 17-70MM?

Found one for $359 on

sigma4less.com


Thanks.

[cedm]

Is it very important that a tripod is used with this lens? I am used to shooting handheld with my 18-55MM IS and 55-250MM IS. I am considering buying this lens to replace my 18-55MM IS so that I can take more wider shots and better landscapes and portraits.

Also which would be a better choice?

Tamron 17-50MM or Sigma 17-70MM?

Found one for $359 on

sigma4less.com


Thanks.


You don't need IS unless your shutter speed is too low, and that will only help if you shoot static subjects. IS won't freeze your subject, it only help with lens shake.

At 50mm, as long as your shutter speed is above 1/60s, you should be fine. At 17mm, you can go as low as 1/30s and still be fine. That's rough approximation, it depends on how stable you are.

The Tamron is 1-2 stops faster than the Canon lens you have, so even though it doesn't have IS, it'll still fare pretty good in low <strike>shutter speed</strike> light conditions compared to your Canon. And it will definitely be better at freezing subject's motion.

Between, the Tamron 17-50 and Sigma 17-70, I would go for the Tamron. Constant maximum aperture of 2.8 across the range is a winner here. The Sigma's maximum aperture ranges from 2.8 to 4 if i'm not mistaken.

[yogestee]

I have the 18-55 IS w/ my 40D right now. Should I buy this over the Canon 50 f/1.4 prime?

Nope IMHO,, owning both would be a good combination.. The Tamron 17-50mm for everyday photoraphy and the 50mm F/1.4 for lowlight stuff..

[Skunkshocker]

I have the nifty-fifty, a great performer w/low light shots. I don't see the need for $300 more investment for 1/8 more stop. I have been leaning towards the Tammy but I wanted to see what the opinion between it and the Sigma was. Thank you both.

[Aikita]

There is a 2/3 stop difference between 50mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.4 not 1/8.
The nifty-fifty has a slower AF and it has difficulties in low light, you have to be patient with it.
My first lens was nifty-fifty then I got Tammy 17-50mm sold my nifty-fifty and I got a flash. Now I have the 50mm f/1.4 but I have to tell you that the Tammy is the one I use the most.

[MisterBryan]

I'm thinking about buying this lens for my 40D.
I'm kind of worried about because its a non-IS lens.I'm going to shoot day and night.
Would the 2.8 aperture balance out its non-IS feature?

Should I buy this or the sigma 18-50?

[Skunkshocker]

Sorry, 2/3 not 1/8. Still learning Photography math.

Thanks.

[Tessa]

http://recce.pri.ee/album168/kose147.jpg

[GeoffSFAs10]

so i think im going to get one of these lens. i found one for 275 bucks. from the original owner with all paper work and such. seems to be a good deal.

[jjdurrant]

^^ very good deal.

I am in the market for one myself.

[keener]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3436/3289023961_012b0dca54_b.jpg

edit: does anyone know a good way to correct distortion?? hehe ;-)

[Skunkshocker]

I think the two recent photo posts prove that this lens can deliver amazing results while lacking IS.

[dufrenbk]

IS at 50mm is not necessary sorry to tell you that. It's not THAT difficult to hold the camera still enough to shoot at 1/30th a second if you need to, even at 50mm.
This is a most excellent lens that I get amazing results with! If you're thinking about getting it, stop thinking, just do it!

[Daniel2000]

IS at 50mm is not necessary sorry to tell you that. It's not THAT difficult to hold the camera still enough to shoot at 1/30th a second if you need to, even at 50mm.
This is a most excellent lens that I get amazing results with! If you're thinking about getting it, stop thinking, just do it!

I totally agree :)

[GeoffSFAs10]

its difficult for me, but i shake alittle bit so that doesnt help. haha.

Anyway, picking up my lens on Monday and im promtly going to go play with it and see what i can do with it. im pretty excited to get a 2.8 lens :D finally will start pushing for weddings after i get a new body

[keener]

okay, so while we're on the topic of IS with this lens.. IS is one of the things that I once wished that this lens had. One of the types of shots that I like to do is to introduce motion blur into my compositions, either surrounding my subject or the subject itself. An IS lens would really help in this department because shutter speeds are really slow, but you want to be steady enough to maintain sharpness in the composition where blur is not intended. Anyway, After using this lens for that purpose I stopped wishing for IS in this lens. It is so light that hand holding it at low shutter speeds is quite doable. Sure, it would still be easier with IS but the option for IS (aka canon 17-55IS) is quite a premium. In contrast, my 24-70 "brick" is too heavy to achieve these types of shots.

50mm; f 4.5; 1/30sec: to blur the train as it entered the station.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3044/2771397022_c1e5f78507_o.jpg

21mm; f13; 0.3 sec; to blur the train and the people as they rushed by.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3166/2586480204_67c90abeb1_b.jpg

[MisterBryan]

I'm thinking about buying this lens or the kit lnsfor my 40D.
I'm kind of worried about because its a non-IS lens.I'm going to shoot day and night.
Would the 2.8 aperture balance out its non-IS feature

anyone?

[keener]

balance out its non-IS feature?

Should I buy this or the sigma 18-50?

Sometimes yes and sometimes no. The IS will only help you if your subjects are static (stationary). If this is the case, then IS will help you hand hold when your shutter speed is slower due to low lighting situations. However, in these low light situations, if your subjects so much as flinch the slow shutter speeds will blur their movement so IS isn't helping you in that situation. A 2.8 aperture *might* help, but if it is really dark, it won't help their either. You may need to switch to a faster lens like a prime lens in the 1.4 to 2.0 range. However, in low light even those apertures might not save you. You would be better off with a flash in that case. A flash has the added benefit of allowing you to use any of the lenses you've suggested without worrying if it'll work or not in low light. The flash will take care of the low light by adding light for you.

You're asking people in the "Tamron 17-50" thread if you should buy the Tamron or the Sigma ??? hehe..

[MisterBryan]

lol. okay. i guess i'll use a 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 if it gets too dark.
rofls, maybe someone here have tried a sigma too. :lol:
thank you and i think im going to get this tamron lens.
wish me luck that it isn't going to be defected.

[binlerne]

anyone?


With the 40D having good high ISO performance, IS isn't entirely necessary. I've shot at f/2.8 on an XT and 1600 and it's workable, but noisy for me. 2.8 and a high ISO will let you get a decent shutter speed wher eyou can just steady yourself prior to pressing the shutter, but remember you are shooting at f/2.8 and your DoF will be relatively small.

Question yourself, is the IS worth the extra couple hundred dollars say if you went for a Canon 17-55 IS? It wasn't for me.

[keener]

lol. okay. i guess i'll use a 50 1.8 or 85 1.8 if it gets too dark.
rofls, maybe someone here have tried a sigma too. :lol:
thank you and i think im going to get this tamron lens.
wish me luck that it isn't going to be defected.

If you like the pictures you've seen in this thread then you won't be disappointed :-) I haven't tried the sigma but from what I hear the Tamron is sharper. For indoor low light your 1.8 primes will server you better than a 2.8, or even a 2.8 with IS (like the canon 17-55). On my 40D my 17-50 is my walk around lens, but when lighting gets scarce I'll slap on my 50mm 1.4 or use a flash. Sometimes I use the 50 1.4 with a flash :-D

[MisterBryan]

With the 40D having good high ISO performance, IS isn't entirely necessary. I've shot at f/2.8 on an XT and 1600 and it's workable, but noisy for me. 2.8 and a high ISO will let you get a decent shutter speed wher eyou can just steady yourself prior to pressing the shutter, but remember you are shooting at f/2.8 and your DoF will be relatively small.

Question yourself, is the IS worth the extra couple hundred dollars say if you went for a Canon 17-55 IS? It wasn't for me.

hmmm. my budget is pretty low. so i guess 17-50 is for me.

If you like the pictures you've seen in this thread then you won't be disappointed :-) I haven't tried the sigma but from what I hear the Tamron is sharper. For indoor low light your 1.8 primes will server you better than a 2.8, or even a 2.8 with IS (like the canon 17-55). On my 40D my 17-50 is my walk around lens, but when lighting gets scarce I'll slap on my 50mm 1.4 or use a flash. Sometimes I use the 50 1.4 with a flash :-D

thanks for the advice. can't wait till i get this lens.

i heard it has a low AF speed when theres low light.

[blssdwlf]

i heard it has a low AF speed when theres low light.

Yes. In general, most lenses+body focusing speed slows down when the lighting level gets low and there is low contrast. If you plan to shoot in low-light, you'll need to learn how to focus with and without any focusing aids (like an AF light or flashlight). This goes for any lens out there.

[binlerne]

I just sent mine out today for service. It picked up some large pieces of dust that actually show up in images. :( It has also been front focusing pretty badly lately. It was fine when I got it but not so much anymore. I miss it already.

http://www.jerrin.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=300&g2_serialNumber=2

[drRex]

Whoa, that's really green. Cool :cool:

[jjdurrant]

I picked one up local\used for $300... pretty good deal huh?

I can't wait to use it!

[Bobster]

IS at 50mm is not necessary sorry to tell you that. It's not THAT difficult to hold the camera still enough to shoot at 1/30th a second if you need to, even at 50mm.
This is a most excellent lens that I get amazing results with! If you're thinking about getting it, stop thinking, just do it!
i was hand holding @ 1/5 the other night!

[jjdurrant]

Couple shots from yesterday..


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3595/3295408082_fd1cf951df.jpg?v=0


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3536/3295407978_610f9bb5c7.jpg?v=0

[Skunkshocker]

Beautiful tree shot.

[Eastside]

I love this lens! :p

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3297/3282630073_b3983869dc.jpg

[mrgooch]

Baby - f/8 50mm Trees f/10 50mm

[ESMcBlurM3]

Still loving this lens!!

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb35/emcbane/IMG_5375crop2.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb35/emcbane/IMG_5382.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb35/emcbane/IMG_5383.jpg

Does tammy make something with similar quality that's wider?! That's my next purchase

[drRex]

Tamron came out with a 10-24mm lens recently. Here is the dpreview.com article:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_10-24_3p5-5p6_n15/

Looks like it might be a good one. :cool:

I love this lens too!!

[bad karma]

I want a 10-24 2.8 :D

To match my 28-75 2.8 and then the 70-200 2.8

Haha

[ESMcBlurM3]

Tamron came out with a 10-24mm lens recently. Here is the dpreview.com article:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_10-24_3p5-5p6_n15/

Looks like it might be a good one. :cool:

I love this lens too!!
Thanks - I wonder if anyone has any real world experience with it yet..

[xblindx]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3114/3221005285_0e57af2aed_b.jpg

[adawar]

Just got this lens, so far loving it!

http://annu.dawar.name/export/TamronBlackBerryFun.jpg

[Dyaus]

Hi all...
Here one from my 17-50 :D

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3054/3051201174_6517d51b0d.jpg

[Zillon]

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/Sports/Track%20and%20Field/relay4x.jpg

[jjdurrant]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3126/3304149670_9739150fe0.jpg?v=0


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3630/3304147858_798c20a82c.jpg?v=0


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3379/3304145826_c93ff950b4.jpg?v=0


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3351/3304142256_d84f66dbcf.jpg?v=0


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3486/3303318757_68fb199f5a.jpg?v=0

[musicmaster]

http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/4294/img5164.jpg

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/6939/img5160edmw3.jpg

http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/3826/img5162.jpg

[Vndcatr]

First shots taken on my 50D + tamron 17-50 2.8

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/452497072_3gU3e-M.jpg

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/452497020_UbMMR-M.jpg

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/455033644_LQ644-M.jpg

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/452497065_3VL3A-M.jpg

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

Great shots everyone!

I'm still trying to decide between this lens, and the Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8 I.S.

I have a nerve problem in my hands, which causes a bit of "shakiness" at times, esp when holding a camera. It doesn't happen all the time, but it does happen.

This is why I'm leaning toward the Canon, but the sharpness/crispness of the pics from the Tamron that have been posted here, and also the vibrancy of the colours, makes it a hard decision. As I find the pics from the Tamron have a bit more "POP" to them.

Not to mention the cost savings factor.

Decisions decisions decisions. lol

[yogestee]

Great shots everyone!

I'm still trying to decide between this lens, and the Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8 I.S.

I have a nerve problem in my hands, which causes a bit of "shakiness" at times, esp when holding a camera. It doesn't happen all the time, but it does happen.

This is why I'm leaning toward the Canon, but the sharpness/crispness of the pics from the Tamron that have been posted here, and also the vibrancy of the colours, makes it a hard decision. As I find the pics from the Tamron have a bit more "POP" to them.

Not to mention the cost savings factor.

Decisions decisions decisions. lol

,,,but a happy decision to make all the same..

[KayakPhotos]

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d140/zillon3/Photography/Sports/Track%20and%20Field/relay4x.jpg
Great capture! I really like the perspective that you shot from on this one.

[roynaldo1]

Really want this lens but completely out of my price range for now!

[ride5000]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3475/3265688459_01ae3854b6.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3265688459/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3423/3233600889_0d43a52762.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3233600889/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3147/3293686956_e1760169f0.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3293686956/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3423/3253140619_783f0ee5e3.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3253140619/)

great lens! very happy with mine, bought used from b+h a little over a year ago...

[KayakPhotos]

Great captures. I really like the second. I think B&W works well for winter landscapes. Can't wait to get this lens!
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3475/3265688459_01ae3854b6.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3265688459/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3423/3233600889_0d43a52762.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3233600889/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3147/3293686956_e1760169f0.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3293686956/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3423/3253140619_783f0ee5e3.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3253140619/)

great lens! very happy with mine, bought used from b+h a little over a year ago...

[jaszypoo]

Nice pictures, everyone! Can't wait for my copy...it's on its way. :D

[Skunkshocker]

I finally got mine, need to take it out on a test drive this weekend. I will post results.

[MG30D]

Sorry if this has already been asked...but I don't fell like reading every single post. ;)

Will the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 fit on a 5D or 1D camera?

Also, how does this lens compare to the Tokina 16-50 f/2.8?

[Daniel2000]

won't fit on full frame (5D & 1D)
and I don't know the tokina

[MG30D]

won't fit on full frame (5D & 1D)
and I don't know the tokina
Thanks...that's what I was afraid of. :( To bad, it was on my wish list before I decided to look into trading my 30D for a 5D or 1D.

[ride5000]

it FITS just fine.

you might not like the vignette though. ;)

[colourblindphotographer]

Hi Guys I'm new here in POTN though I've been browsing this site for months now. I'd like to share my experience with this Tammy... I love it!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3523/3323732869_1456e8eb5c.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3420/3323732809_fb817ae7b2.jpghttp://farm4.static.flickr.com/3346/3324557942_537035c640.jpghttp://farm4.static.flickr.com/3507/3324557928_6fab103794.jpghttp://farm4.static.flickr.com/3307/3323743415_e50701c604.jpg

[yogestee]

Hi Guys I'm new here in POTN though I've been browsing this site for months now. I'd like to share my experience with this Tammy... I love it!

Welcome to the cauldron.. Some nice images from your Tamron..

[colourblindphotographer]

Welcome to the cauldron.. Some nice images from your Tamron..

Cheers.
I noticed that its very soft at f2.8
Sharp at 3.5
Tack Sharp at 5

[yogestee]

Cheers.
I noticed that its very soft at f2.8
Sharp at 3.5
Tack Sharp at 5

Most lenses even topshelf offerings from Canon and Nikon aren't usually at their best wide open.. My Tamron is slightly softer at F/2.8 but not very soft,, could be subjective..

Post a few examples shot wide open..

[ride5000]

Cheers.
I noticed that its very soft at f2.8
Sharp at 3.5
Tack Sharp at 5

VERY soft? not my copy..

all at f/2.8 (i don't like usm sharpening either):


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2188/2434232161_80f628991e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/2434232161/)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3180/2896073201_29213ac85c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/2896073201/)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3057/2435049858_269883b63c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/2435049858/)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3032/3148602739_10967a2602.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/3148602739/)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3005/2436569225_f3d0100322.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/2436569225/)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3183/2587927146_f49021e58b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ken-gilbert/2587927146/)

[colourblindphotographer]

I might be doing a lot of shakes. I'll take some shots tonight or check my photos at home. I think I expect too much for 2.8 compared to 3.5 or 5. I recall when I took a photo of my daughter and focused in the eyes & same distance the eye lashes aren't as sharp as the f3.5 or f5.

[KayakPhotos]

I might be doing a lot of shakes. I'll take some shots tonight or check my photos at home. I think I expect too much for 2.8 compared to 3.5 or 5. I recall when I took a photo of my daughter and focused in the eyes & same distance the eye lashes aren't as sharp as the f3.5 or f5.

Sounds like you could be missing focus a little bit. Depth of field isn't that large at f/2.8 if you are up close. I'd say work on your holding technique and see if you are moving around a bit.