Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

[Stan43]

Any experience with this lens. The tests I've read seem to be favorable from an IQ. Can't beat the price ,Apx. $499 , for the 2.8 vs. 17-40 or others.

[Guineh]

I have it, so far I like it. At 2.8 on the wide end its slightly soft, but stop it down to 4, or even 3.6 and its razor sharp, Sharpening works reasonably well on images I've taken with 2.8. The only real complaint I have is the noisy AF motor, but thats minor.

[Tee Why]

Just bought one for $439 at Beachcamera.
From what I read, the optics are very good, especially corner sharpness. The colors of the Tamron is very good as well. Optically, the only downside maybe CA at 17mm according to photozone.de, but I wasn't concerned from looking at his shot taken at 17mm at f2.8. The other is the vingetting at f2.8 at 17mm, again a minor thing for me in real world photos. Lastly at 17, there is a bit of barrel distortion. Then again, what 17mm zooms don't have this? It certainly has less CA and maybe even less distortion than the Sigma's version. It certainly is sharper on the corners than the Sigma.

In terms of build quality, this is where Tamron falls behind. It looks like their philosophy is to deliver top notch optics with a mediocore build for a great price. So the lens barrel is light and plasticky, the AF is noisier and slower, and the MF ring rotates during focusing.

However, if the best optics per dollar is your goal, current line up of Tamrons for dslr is hard to beat.

[Stan43]

Thanks for the feedback. As I agonize over lens choices, part of our destiny, my latest thought is that I will add a FF body after the next Canon iteration of 5D,3D or whatever.
I'll still keep the 20D but maybe the 17-40 0r 16-35 would be a smarter purchase. You can see by my sig that I can get by until then. Either would give me wide capability with great build quality and resale value if need be.

I have been concentrating on lenses I can keep for a long time. I have read about build quality of the Tammy elsewhere. I migt just stay with Canon as funds allow.

[Tee Why]

The 17-40L maybe a better long term investment for the resale and ability to use it with a FF sensor as well, not to mention the build quality difference. The only problem for some is the cost difference.

[us_navyls]

In terms of build quality, this is where Tamron falls behind. It looks like their philosophy is to deliver top notch optics with a mediocore build for a great price. So the lens barrel is light and plasticky, the AF is noisier and slower, and the MF ring rotates during focusing.

However, if the best optics per dollar is your goal, current line up of Tamrons for dslr is hard to beat.

I have one. If I have to pay a price I rather have good optics with less good build than the other way round...the goal is doing good photos after all...! Of course I would prefer to have also excellent build but then probably it would cost 800$...

Anyway I am not dissatisfied with build, I like it, it feels good to me. but maybe it is me who is too easily satisfied...maybe it is because I've never had an L so I don't know really the difference

[LightRules]

maybe it is because I've never had an L so I don't know really the difference

:rolleyes:

:)

[Stan43]

Well put! When the optics are very good where does the good vs. great build quality come into play ...when the cost is considerably less I guess. Many have said they like the Tamron. I guess I'm back where I started but I probably can't go wrong.

As has been said many times on this blog. Make a choice and then go take the best pics you can.

[Tee Why]

Looking at your gear, I guess you find yourself switching between the Toke and the 24-105L and want something that goes from late teens to mid range like a 17-50. I've had two tammies and the optics and the value are good that I ordered another one, so I'm voting with my wallet. I forget the feel of the lens when I shoot and the results of the optics are in the pro class, so I guess it's all a personal decision.

I can whole heartedly recommend the new XR Di line of Tamrons as they are all great lenses in my view with excellent values. Those that want a lens that "feel" great should look elsewhere though. Those that want the best bang for the bucks in optics and purely optics can stop looking.

[dave_bass5]

Ill agree with the others. its a very nice, sharp lens. not too sharp wide open at f/2.8 but usable if needed.
The Tamrons feels cheaper than canons but its the optics that count IMHO and the Tamrons are spot on.
I have the 17-50 and had the 28-75 and they are the sharpest lens's i have owned

[grego]

We need to make a lens sample thread for this lens. :)

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=141406

[dave_bass5]

Good idea
Heres one i like. not a great comp but nice and sharp
http://davepearce.smugmug.com/photos/91551230-O.jpg

[Jman13]

The Tamron looks to be a good bet. From all the test shots I've seen, it seems be very good optically. I have handled one, but never shot with one. The build was ok. Better than a lot of consumer lenses, but not pro-level.

The build is one reason I'm waiting to see if the new Tokina 16-50 f/2.8 (which should be out in the next couple months) is as optically good as the Tamron, since I know first hand just how good Tokina builds their lenses.

[YARRO]

I have the Tammy.
IQ is very good. Especially when taking "real world" pics.
Build quality is indeed not as good as an L-lens, but is much better than most Canon consumer lenses. When extended there's no wobble and no zoom creep.
It feels solid enough.

[Tee Why]

Yeah, I'd classify their optics as L level and build quality as just above Canon consumer grade level as well, at about $100 or so above Canon consumer grade prices.
Good deal overall.

[jestergx4]

I chose the Canon 17-40L over the Tammy because of its build quality, quick and silent focusing, not to mention a full-time focusing. Its IQ is great. I am greatly satisified with this lens. I can also use this on a FF should I choose to upgrade the body, and most of all: its an "L":D

[LightRules]

and most of all: its an "L":D

S-I-G-H :cry:

[Stan43]

Thanks everyone for their opinions, which I value. I took the live for today approach and ordered the Tamron 17-50 2.8 from B&H. If and when I go FF I'll consider selling.

[Tee Why]

sometimes I wonder if L stands for Lemmings or something.

[papucla10]

I am buying the Sigma 17-70 because of the extra range.

[Tee Why]

OK, just got the tammy,
did some quick tests on it. I even have a cheapo S&W MC UV filter from eBay, so I tested it against no filter against a strong midday sun for flares, IQ degradation.
I'll post some pics in a bit so we can all pixel peep.

[Tee Why]

Initial impression is that the build quality is about the same as the other current tammies.
The AF has a higher freq sound compared to the 17-35 and 28-75. The AF is also quicker than the two lenses as well. In terms of optics, it looks very impressive. The corner is pretty sharp at f2.8 at all focal lengths and sharpens up a touch by f4 and at about f11, things start to soften up again, but not bad till about f16/22. Things are soft by f32.

CA isn't bad at 17mm f2.8, which should have the worst CA.
I took two shots under flare situations with and without a S&W Multicoated UV filter, so you can see for yourself if there is any difference.
whole gallery is here, all shot in RAW at ISO 800 (woops too excited and forgot to turn it down), converted to High qual JPEG in RSP. http://tomyi.smugmug.com/gallery/1844047
ok, 17mm f2.8 focus is on the center not the corner, so it's oof.
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415965-M.jpg
100% of the CA, per photozone.de CA and vingetting is worst at 17mm f2.8 so this should be the worst situation.
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415966-M.jpg

Now some tests with and without a filter. You decide which is which
Center IQ test, A
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415954-M.jpg
100% of A
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415955-M.jpg
100% of B
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415957-M.jpg

[Tee Why]

Ok, lets check for flare with and without a filter. You decide which is which.
1A
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415959-M.jpg
1B
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415960-M.jpg

2A
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415961-M.jpg
2B
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415962-M.jpg

3A
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415963-M.jpg
3B
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415964-M.jpg

http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415967-M.jpg
4A 100% crop
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415968-M.jpg
4B 100% crop
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92415953-M.jpg

All right, let the pixel peeping orgy begin

[Tee Why]

Any thoughts or guesses on which shots were made with filters?

[cdifoto]

Any thoughts or guesses on which shots were made with filters?

Probably B set, assuming you kept A and B as actual filter-no filter sets instead of mixing and matching.

[Tee Why]

Probably B set, assuming you kept A and B as actual filter-no filter sets instead of mixing and matching.
Can you tell us your reasoning, although I think it's fairly visible?

[cdifoto]

Can you tell us your reasoning, although I think it's fairly visible?

I see more flare.

[Tee Why]

I see, no other bites.
Yup, the B shots have the UV filter. Shooting into a very bright sun at the widest focal length does produce some noticable increase in flare.

[dave_bass5]

Heres one i took with my 17-50 f/2.8 at 17mm
I have a Hoya super HMC Pro1 UV on it and i still got flare. kind of like the effect though.
http://davepearce.smugmug.com/photos/91381141-L.jpg

[Tee Why]

Shooting into the sun with or without a filter causes flares, you do seem to lose a bit of contrast when using the filter though. I tend to take them off when I shoot into a strong light source.

[LightRules]

Nice little write-up, Tom. The Tamron 17-50 looks like another good one. I'm currently trying to decide if I want to reacquire the 17-55IS or wait for the Tokina 16-50. The price of the Canon is pretty steep and I'd have to just live with the flare issue, but otherwise it's a killer lens. Then again, maybe I will just wait for the DX Pro, which I have grown to like very much Tokina's build-feel and pop-clutch AF mechanism. Having 16mm will be nice too. We'll see, but regardless, enjoy the excellent Tammy.

[Tee Why]

Thanks, I took it out to Venice Beach already and find the range and the speed of the lens really nice. In real world shooting, I find the lens very sharp and in need of very little sharpening. Reading their updated website, I'm starting to appreciate their build approach. The use of plastics reduces weight, cost, and eliminates the need to oil the lens as the plastic has self lubricating properties. Reminds me of the use of plastics in the glock pistols. Not the most attractive or good in terms of feel, but highly functional and utilitarian. Here is a link to my post of the shots from Venice.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=211362

In terms of optics, after having owned two of the new Tokinas and three Di Tammies, I'd say the Tammie's optics feel better to me in terms of color and especially CA. The CA has been an issue with tokes and usually fast wideangles should be bad in terms of producing CA's, so unless something with tokes, especially coating, has changed, I'd suspect the CA issue may come up with the upcoming toke 16-50. Plus, I got sick of waiting for them to release the lense. Having said all this, I still think the toke will also be a good lens and do like their build quality as well.

[LightRules]

Reading their updated website, I'm starting to appreciate their build approach. The use of plastics reduces weight, cost, and eliminates the need to oil the lens as the plastic has self lubricating properties. Reminds me of the use of plastics in the glock pistols. Not the most attractive or good in terms of feel, but highly functional and utilitarian.

I have no doubt that today's "plastics" are quite durable and even revolutionary. That's why I always speak of "build-feel" rather than "build"; it's more a subjective/objective distinction, I suppose. "In-hand" (i.e., build-feel), the DX Pro/EX/L glass just feel a whole lot better than most other makes. But if I took a 28-70L and 28-75Di and dropped them from 6-8 feet up flat onto concrete, I'm sure both would need a trip to the service center (be it for a cracked housing or decentered element, etc.). So I don't put much emphasis on "build" per se, but "build-feel". And with all that said, Tamron has done an excellent job especially as of late in the arena of optics per se. I think the 1750 is another testiment to that.

[jcw122]

Great to hear all this good news about the new Tamron!

I myself will be waiting til the end of September to buy it, and if the Tokina is not out by then, I'll buy the Tamron.

I'm excited to see how the Tokina does, especially with it's fast AF mechanism, and it's 9-blade diaphram. That will be pretty cool.

What I may do, is just use the 30-day return policy if the Tokina releases during October.

[gryphonslair99]

I've had the lens now for a couple of weeks and really like it. Just a few images that I have taken with it.

1. [http://img391.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rudyzf9.jpg

2. http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/3096/tallgrassprariehomeiq8.jpg

3. http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/119/policestationqt4.jpg

4. http://img461.imageshack.us/img461/9446/courthousecottonwoodfallstr8.jpg

[Heatseeker99]

Tamron 17-50 2.8
1/60s f/20.0 at 17.0mm iso100
http://i.pbase.com/o4/02/683502/1/66943709.9hiTBVR5.Newconstruction.jpg
100% crop
http://i.pbase.com/o4/02/683502/1/66943742.f7RvwFmX.Newconstruction_100crop.jpg

[peanuthead]

I've had the Tamron for about 2 weeks now, and I really love this lens.
This lens is as sharp as my 24-105 4L. In fact, the Tamron has become my most frequently used lens.
I really like the constant f2.8, as I do a lot of low-light shooting without flash.
I had debated between the Tamron and the Canon 17-55mm, but decided that I wanted a smaller, lighter weight lens that I could easily carry around. Also, it bothered me that the Canon was not dust-sealed (I'd expect that for the price...)

[Tee Why]

I've had this for about 3 weeks now and it's really starting to grow on me as well.
The optics are excellent and the lens is very functional. Only thing that bothers me is the noisy AF in a quiet room.

[bryan k]

After reading several positive reviews on this lens here and in some magazines, I picked up one of these lenses about a month ago. I had a friends wedding coming up and figured that would be a decent test for the lens- unfortunately, a week before the wedding (2 weeks after I bought it), the end of the lens developed quite a "rattle" with enough movement to actually cause blur on one end of the shot (or another depending on how it was angled)... This was my first non-canon lens purchase and don't know if it was just bad luck or what, but I returned it (luckly, I bought it through Amazon), and am now looking for a replacement. So many others seem to love this lens, I may give it another try (ot the 28-70 2.8). I am just skeptical since that one didn't make it 1 month...

[Tee Why]

Sounds odd, this is my third Tamron and they have all worked flaulessly.
I'd give it another try if I were you.

[Jarrad]

My test results:

17mm
http://xs306.xs.to/xs306/06382/17mm.jpg


25mm
http://xs306.xs.to/xs306/06382/25mm.jpg


36mm
http://xs306.xs.to/xs306/06382/36mm.jpg


50 vs 50 1.8 vs 50 1.4 Centres
http://xs306.xs.to/xs306/06382/50sCentres.jpg


50 vs 50 1.8 vs 50 1.4 Edges
http://xs306.xs.to/xs306/06382/50sEdges.jpg

:)

[Tee Why]

Ah, pixel peeping at it's finest. :)

[bryan k]

Tamron 17-50 2.8 Shot (w/crop)

[Tee Why]

looks pretty good

[biggpopa]

Bought this lens last week for my trip to Niagara Falls, and loved it. The 17-40L was a bit out of my price range, so I bought this lens, and figured, if I didn't like it, I'd return it, and find a way to come up with the extra cash for the 17-40L, but to my surprise, the lens was great. I'm happy with it. Build quality is good, I like the feel of it, a bit noisy when AF, but I can live with it.

[dailykimchi]

Any more pictures?

[dave_bass5]

Any more pictures?
Heres one of the first i took with my 17-50 f/2.8 on my new 30D
http://davepearce.smugmug.com/photos/99225314-O.jpg

[biggpopa]

Any more pictures?


here's one I posted in my other thread.

[dailykimchi]

Wow, those pictures are sharp. Looks like I'm going to get this lens. Thanks. :)

[Tee Why]

Alright, I'd better add some. From Venice Beach, CA
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92543412-L.jpg
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92543411-L.jpg
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/92543413-L.jpg

[Luckie8]

nice shots Tee

[Heatseeker99]

Taken @ 50mm_f2.8_1/500s

http://i.pbase.com/g5/02/683502/2/67991552.skwItA3v.jpg

[Tee Why]

nice shots Tee
why thank you.

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

im curious... is it bad that the ring moves when autofocusing.. not decoupled?

[Luckie8]

you just have to watch your fingers to not touch it during AF

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

why, what would happen, i notice the sigma 18-50 has the same thing?

[Tee Why]

I think it's an older AF motor design thing. Well atleast that makes it cheaper.
I don't think I'd want to pay another $100 for the same lens with a USM/HSM like motor.

[Statement]

I am about to buy this lens from amazon because it comes with the hood and has free shipping for only $5 more than b+h. So I will hope to see a huge difference between my only lens, a 50mm f/1.8 and this one.

[Tee Why]

The hood is part of the lens, so you get that no matter where you buy the tamron from.
The 50mm f1.8 is a very sharp lens, so I'd doubt you'd see much is any increase in sharpness over the 50mm f1.8.

[Jarrad]

17mm, cropped a bit
http://xs208.xs.to/xs208/06424/_MG_6125-2.jpg

[Statement]

The hood is part of the lens, so you get that no matter where you buy the tamron from.


Really? where is it?

http://www.photographyblog.com/images/products/tamron_17_50mm_1.jpg

[Jarrad]

Tamron lenses come with their corresponding hoods.

I received one with mine. :)

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

any of you have trouble dealing with the af noise?
also how quick is the searching/hunting in low light

[dailykimchi]

Beautiful shot, Jarrad.

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

yea

[Tee Why]

Really? where is it?

http://www.photographyblog.com/images/products/tamron_17_50mm_1.jpg
It's in the box., not included in the picture, hood, wrappings, warranty papers, instructions, and box.

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

any of you have trouble dealing with the af noise?
also how quick is the searching/hunting in low light

anyone, before tomarrow hits?

[Tee Why]

It's noisier than some lenses, but the AF speed isn't bad.
Check here.
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_17-50_review.html

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

lets say, concert type stuff? and maybe some sports

also, um.. lets say your hands get in the way of the ring when its focusing, what happens?

[Jarrad]

Beautiful shot, Jarrad.

Thank you very much :)

[Tee Why]

lets say, concert type stuff? and maybe some sports

also, um.. lets say your hands get in the way of the ring when its focusing, what happens?

As for the noise, check Bob Atkins site for the MP3 of the AF noise. If you have a finger on the AF ring, then it'll just rub against your finger. I'd doubt anyone would grab the ring so tight that it would prevent the AF ring from turning.

[irhxcbcziuzxs]

As for the noise, check Bob Atkins site for the MP3 of the AF noise. If you have a finger on the AF ring, then it'll just rub against your finger. I'd doubt anyone would grab the ring so tight that it would prevent the AF ring from turning.

heh, i did.. with the store copy.. oopsie

[flashtoby]

Just purchased this lens this week, took it out with me on a walk with the good wife to a local park and got a couple of shots, I think Im going to really become best of buddies with this baby.

P.S This is the first time posting any pics for me so I hope their ok.

[flashtoby]

A couple more.

[Tee Why]

yeah, the tammy is a gem of a lens

[red hot sheep]

Nice shots toby, and welcome to the forums!

[Statement]

I just got one today, I am amazed because I have never used a dslr with a wide angle I guess. It feels like I'm using a full frame camera now :)

[Luckie8]

I just got one today, I am amazed because I have never used a dslr with a wide angle I guess. It feels like I'm using a full frame camera now :)
Where are the pics?

[dailykimchi]

I just got one today, I am amazed because I have never used a dslr with a wide angle I guess. It feels like I'm using a full frame camera now :)

Congrats. Test pics please!

[latigid]

Here are some quick test shots with the Tamron the first day I got it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4590.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4592.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4612.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4625.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4628.jpg

[Luckie8]

WOW! Nice shots latigid... ;)

[timmyb]

A fairly glowing review here
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/355/cat/23

My Pbase gallery
http://www.pbase.com/timbateman/tamron_1750_28

[dailykimchi]

Beautiful pictures! I'm leaning towards this lens...thanks!

[saravrose]

Here are some quick test shots with the Tamron the first day I got it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4590.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4592.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4612.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4625.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/nelevado/IMG_4628.jpg

congratulations i'm thrilled that the lens is working out for you since I suggested the store.. it really is a beauty... you're from New York?.. cool place NY I went there once.. stood on the street and almost got plowed down and went to see a show and the statue of liberty and took a subway ride... worlds away from here though...

sari

[mikez]

Can someone post a picture FL of 17mm? Thanks

[foghorn]

If this helps, here is a comparo shot of the Tammy's FF brother, the 28-75 next to the 17-50.
http://cjkphoto.smugmug.com/photos/104673085-M.jpg
Do note, they weren't perfectly aligned, the bigger lens is closer to the camera by about a 1/3 inch. But you get the idea.
Very compact for a 2.8 zoom.

[Gizmo 76]

I was never totally happy with the kit lens that I got with the Canon 400D especially after comparing it with the shots I was getting out of my Canon 60mm Macro Lens.

After much researching Sigma 18-50, Canon 17-40L, and the Tamron 17-50. I finally decided to go with the Tamron, the Canon L nearly had me, but the value and performance ratio won over at the end.

Here is a straight out the camera 100% crop, no PP'in.

http://static.flickr.com/112/290006273_b021b20ccf_o.jpg

I'm really impressed with the sharpness of the lens and the colours just seem to pop more than the kit.

Here is the full version, resized and slightly PP'd

http://static.flickr.com/120/290004202_ec870ca6ac_o.jpg

The build of the lens is solid, mainly plastics but hard plastics. It's not up to the same standard as the Canon 60mm Macro lens, and the auto focus is a little on the louder side, but overall it's a well put together lens in my experience.

Here are a few more i've snapped with it so far.....

Looking out from the Strand
http://static.flickr.com/118/290006275_16879c97d6_o.jpg
Country Park
http://static.flickr.com/122/290004201_6626e50c87_o.jpg

Skeleton Tree
http://static.flickr.com/109/290004191_69f618f877_o.jpg
And of course....

The Neighbours Fireworks
http://static.flickr.com/117/290004196_1700817987_o.jpg

Overall I'm really happy with the lens, feel's nice, colours seem much improved, sharpness is great, and it look's good on the camera with it's little hood on :grin:

Now to starting looking into a longer lens ;)

Cheers,

Giz.

[dailykimchi]

Giz, amazing pictures and review. It's settled, I'm buying this lens on Saturday!! :)

[Gizmo 76]

Giz, amazing pictures and review. It's settled, I'm buying this lens on Saturday!! :)

You'll love it, I can't get over how sharp the pictures are straight out of the camera and the contrast and colour is just great to my eyes.

It focuses so much quicker than the Kit which I found hunted quite a bit, and as it's an f2.8 it looks nice and bright in the viewfinder and open's up many more creative options.

It produces a really nice DOF effect as well on the out of focus areas. I'll try and post some 50mm f2.8 shots to show this if I get time or the light (damn dark winters (autumns ;) ))

[Statement]

Congrats. Test pics please!

Forgot to come back here, but here's a few pics I've used it for. (Note: I am an amateur and can not represent the capability of this lens)

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/4682/nightfog2vi1.jpg

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/6682/belleisle1tj4.jpg

http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/1281/trials2wu7.jpg

[jcw122]

May be it's me, but the Tamron 28-75 looks a bit sharper...either way, the images both lenses produce are excellent (I don't own either, I'm just judging from the two threads).

I like the WA on the 17-50 though, very cool.

[dailykimchi]

Statement: excellent shots. By this time tomorrow I should have my Kiss Digital X/Tamron 17-50 combo. I'll keep you guys updated!

[dailykimchi]

Statement: excellent shots. By this time tomorrow I should have my Kiss Digital X/Tamron 17-50 combo. I'll keep you guys updated!

So I was ready to buy my camera, but the shop doesn't have the Japanese Warranty 17-50 in stock. They only have the Korean Warranty lenses, which are about $75US more. What would you guys do? I'm probably going to wait it out for the other stock to arrive.

[Luckie8]

So I was ready to buy my camera, but the shop doesn't have the Japanese Warranty 17-50 in stock. They only have the Korean Warranty lenses, which are about $75US more. What would you guys do? I'm probably going to wait it out for the other stock to arrive.
I would ask them if they could do it for the same price.
How much does it cost there anyway?

[Statement]

Statement: excellent shots. By this time tomorrow I should have my Kiss Digital X/Tamron 17-50 combo. I'll keep you guys updated!

Thanks a bunch!

As for your situation, it seems like you just have to decide whether to spend the extra dough or wait, unless there's a big difference b/n the warranties?

[dailykimchi]

I would ask them if they could do it for the same price.
How much does it cost there anyway?

410,000w ($436US) for the Korean warranty
340,000w ($362US) for the Japanese warranty

I tried asking, they won't budge on the same price. 340,000w was the cheapest price I found for the Japanese warranty lens.

Would it be worthwhile to pick up the 50mm f/1.8? Or does the 17-50 make it redundant?

[Luckie8]

Would it be worthwhile to pick up the 50mm f/1.8? Or does the 17-50 make it redundant?
I think the prime 50mm is totally different class than the zoom 17-50 at 50mm.
Both have their own uses eventhough my 17-50 lives on my 30d but in low light condition, I'd use the 50mm or the 30mm

[Statement]

I have both. The 1.8 is what i started with but I almost always hate being confined to a fixed focal length so I tend to stick with the tamron.

[bignoodleboi]

So today I went back and traded in the 28-75 f2.8 for the 17-50 f2.8 and I must admit... i really like this one... for the past week I've been debating on the 17-50 so therefore today I gave in and exchanged the 28-75 for the 17-50mm

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/bignoodleboi/IMG_6122.jpg

once I got out of the store I gotta shoot it and try it on something... i'm happy with it :-) :lol: :) :eek:

[Tee Why]

Yea, the 17-50 on a crop is what 28-75 is supposed to be on a FF. The range is much more useful for most with cropped sensors.

[bignoodleboi]

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/bignoodleboi/IMG_6310.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/bignoodleboi/IMG_6316.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/bignoodleboi/IMG_6400.jpg

here's some more with the new lens I just got... I admit i like it alot :)

[Jarrad]

Well Done, Kevin.
Those shots look great. :)

[dailykimchi]

Excellent shots...very sharp!

I am waiting for the Japanese Warranty Tamron 17-50 to come in stock. It should arrive this week...I can't wait!

[Redstorm]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/lawranz/IMG_1743.jpg

[bignoodleboi]

thanks guys... i had the 28-75 but i wasn't happy so i exchanged it for the new 17-50 overall i'm real happy with it

[samnz]

i had the 28-75 but i wasn't happy so i exchanged it for the new 17-50 overall i'm real happy with it

Thanks Kev - you've pretty much convinced me to do the same. Even though the 28-75 is a gem, I really need the WA at weddings (especially in congested venues). There've been alot of criticismsimsims (u no wat i mean :)) about portraits with the 17-50 but hey - it all comes down to the photographer at the end of the day and how you compose - I hope :confused:
Cheers for posting

Sam

[tripletaker]

I just got the lens today. 15 minutes ago to be exact. The bokeh: amazing. I'm in love.

But I've never heard the AF motor this loud before. It's high-pitched and pretty loud compared to anything I've seen before.

It's still awesome. :)

http://x01.xanga.com/6e3a91f33003192506110/w64410885.jpg

[saravrose]

It's a great lens i'm really enjoying mine..

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b130/saravrose/IMG_5452.jpg

[dailykimchi]

Nice pics guys!! How would you compare the AF noise from the Tamron with the 50mm f/1.8? Noisier or quieter?

[mangkukhayun]

This is one of my landscape from this tammy..

http://static.flickr.com/85/252211602_f758ffa2ba_o.jpg

[Tee Why]

Review here has a sound clip of the AF motor.
http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_17-50_review.html

[jcw122]

Review here has a sound clip of the AF motor.
http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_17-50_review.html

Neat, doesn't sound great, but it definately sounds quick.

[Tee Why]

It's AF motor is higher pitched than Tamron's 17-35 and 28-75. In a very quiet place it is very noticable, but the AF speed is pretty fast. When I'm shooting, I'm concentrating so the sound is barely noticable to me. If the AF noise is a issue the Canon would be a lot quieter and more expensive. I don't know how the Sigma's are, and I'm almost sure the upcoming toke will be a bit quieter.

[Tee Why]

Took some pics with it at the Hollywood Halloween Carnaval and the range was almost perfect and I shot pretty much wide all night.
Oh Oh, is it me? or are the corners soft here?
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/107376762-M.jpg
Is this lens distortion or is she just... never mind.
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/photos/107268631-M.jpg

[tripletaker]

Nice pics guys!! How would you compare the AF noise from the Tamron with the 50mm f/1.8? Noisier or quieter?My 50mm 1.8 isn't that loud. It's never been noticable to me. But the 17-50 is just really high pitched. That website above gives a good clip.

[Tee Why]

Tested it against a couple of Sigma primes, the 30mm f1.4DC and the 28mm f1.8 DG macro. It fares very well against them.
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/gallery/2000895

[dailykimchi]

The shop that I am buying my 17-50 from is OOS of the Jap Warranty lens. The Korea Warranty lens is $60 more...so I'd have to pay 400 vs 340. They said it would be another 2 weeks. I really want to get my lens as I'm heading on a trip to Dubai for Xmas. What to do!? I can't stop reading about the Sigma 17-70, but I know I want that constant f/2.8 aperture.

[dailykimchi]

Alrighty, ladies and gentlemen, after posting so much about the Tamron I couldn't wait any longer so I pulled the trigger and bought the lens with the Korean warranty (I wanted this lens for an upcoming trip to the UAE)! :) I got a free Kenko UV filter with my purchase too (anything free is good in my books).

Anyways, here are a few test shots...any recommendations on testing this lens for focus issues? I love it so far--fast focus and the range is perfect for me! :D

Samgyetang (Korean ginseng chicken soup)
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/115992955-M.jpg

Namdaemun Market in Seoul:
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/115993708-M.jpg

Here's a link to the rest of my test gallery:
http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/2226307/1/115992368

[da_teacher]

My sister-in-law's ADHD Boston Terrier was freakin' out because of the AF motor--growling at the camera and jumping towards my camera...it was pretty funny but I was finally able to get a shot.

http://i17.tinypic.com/4grdztg.jpg

[jcw122]

Phenominal pictures Kevin.

[Souwalker]

Alrighty, ladies and gentlemen, after posting so much about the Tamron I couldn't wait any longer so I pulled the trigger and bought the lens with the Korean warranty (I wanted this lens for an upcoming trip to the UAE)! :) I got a free Kenko UV filter with my purchase too (anything free is good in my books).

Anyways, here are a few test shots...any recommendations on testing this lens for focus issues? I love it so far--fast focus and the range is perfect for me! :D

Samgyetang (Korean ginseng chicken soup)
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/115992955-M.jpg

Namdaemun Market in Seoul:
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/115993708-M.jpg

Here's a link to the rest of my test gallery:
http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/2226307/1/115992368

Were the indoor photos in your test gallery taken with tripod?
Pat

[JawsofLife252]

Dailykimchi!!!! I LOVE kimchi!!!!! i'm half korean and my mother is planning on taking me over there soon, I can't wait (mainly because I want to take pictures over there). Great pics!

[angelotti]

Hi.

I own this lens since June and I love it. Some samples:

http://www.hergim.net/cpg149/albums/Fotos%20Digitales/Ciudades%20y%20Pueblos/Castro/De_noche_1.jpg

http://www.hergim.net/cpg149/albums/Fotos%20Digitales/Ciudades%20y%20Pueblos/Madrid/Gran_Via.jpg

http://www.hergim.net/cpg149/albums/Fotos%20Digitales/Paisajes/SanJuanGaztelugatxe/AHP_20061204_4921.jpg

Bye,
Angel.

[dailykimchi]

Were the indoor photos in your test gallery taken with tripod?
Pat

Sorry for the late reply, but nope, all my shots are handheld...this is an amazing lens. I just got back from Dubai, here are some pics:

The Jumeriah Beach Hotel
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/118271743-M.jpg

The Burj Al-Arab
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/118279773-L.jpg

Another shot:
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/118277449-L.jpg

Look at the cranes...it's unbelievable
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/118298727-M.jpg

[dailykimchi]

Dailykimchi!!!! I LOVE kimchi!!!!! i'm half korean and my mother is planning on taking me over there soon, I can't wait (mainly because I want to take pictures over there). Great pics!

Ahn-young-ha-sigh-yo!!! The kimchi here is fabulous...I crave the stuff all the time. :D Thanks!

[imranr]

Here are some night shots of Saarbruecken, Germany. Exposure time is ~30 sec (using tripod, mirror lockup, cable release)

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p297/imranr_photo/IMG_1238.jpg

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p297/imranr_photo/IMG_1202.jpg

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p297/imranr_photo/IMG_1194.jpg

[vctr]

Love my Tammy 17-50 F/2.8 ( Northport Long Island NY )

[dailykimchi]

Amazing pictures, keep them coming everyone!!

[iboey]

Shot through a glass :)

http://boey.zenfolio.com/img/p1051781593-3.jpg


http://boey.zenfolio.com/img/p939557003-3.jpg

[imranr]

Shot through a glass :)

http://boey.zenfolio.com/img/p1051781593-3.jpg


http://boey.zenfolio.com/img/p939557003-3.jpg

Nice shots! did you use any tubes or extender for macro work?

[imranr]

From my recent visit to Trier and Strasbourg.

Porta Nigra (black gate) in Trier, Germany.
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p297/imranr_photo/portanigra.jpg

Strasbourg's Cathedral, France.
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p297/imranr_photo/strasbourgdom.jpg

More from Trier.
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p297/imranr_photo/angels.jpg

[Picklett]

Anyone have a pic of what this lens looks like on the camera (with the hood attached too if possible?)

[vctr]

17-50 F/2.8 mounted on my 350D

[vctr]

One more for the road

[timmyb]

http://www.pbase.com/timbateman/image/63605853.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/75995400.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/timbateman/image/73126694.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/timbateman/tamron_1750_28

[Jakkin]

I thought I'd contribute too... first day out with it.

http://www.jakkin.ukfsn.org/Photos/20.01.2007%20-%20Day%20time%20Quayside/IMG_0140_bridge_Small2.jpg

[stillframeimages]

wow! this lens seems suuuuper sharp. I've been looking at the pictures on the thread and pretty much made my decision that I'm going to buy it....eventually. I'm 16, got a job, but don't get alot of money. I want this lens so bad though! AHHH! lol.

[poah]

here are a few

50mm f3.2

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/4325/5588s2ns.jpg

17mm f2.8

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/4420/9916s3za.jpg

50mm f4

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/803/9856s1sx.jpg

[iboey]

Nice shots! did you use any tubes or extender for macro work?

No tube was used. Not much marco...in fact i crop the pic and its still sharp! :lol:

[cv11591]

hi there. i've been reading the whole bunch of pages about tamron 17-50 and i must say the vast majority seems to be quite happy with this lens. i own an EOS 300D. Has anyone noticed with this lens and camera any problems in AF at 2.8; I'm just asking because i read somewhere that someone had this problem.

Tasos

[Jakkin]

I rarely use this lens at f2.8, sorry can't help :(

[poah]

then why you buy it?

[Jakkin]

For it's range, quality and price. And when I need the wide aperture I have it. I find myself at around F4-F8 the most, so far, haven't have it for long.

[gdrMatt]

http://www.godragracing.com/pics/camaro.jpg
Lens Tamron 17-50mm
Shot RAW. F8.0, 1/5 sec @ ISO 200, 19mm -- yea it was really dark

[yltan]

http://www.godragracing.com/pics/camaro.jpg
Lens Tamron 17-50mm
Shot RAW. F8.0, 1/5 sec @ ISO 200, 19mm -- yea it was really dark

Can someone confirm some problems when used with the internal flash? When used at 17mm with flash, it sometimes comes up underexposed!

YL Tan

[bignoodleboi]

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/bignoodleboi/IMG_9296.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/bignoodleboi/IMG_9169.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/bignoodleboi/IMG_9380.jpg



here's some more pic with the 17-50... so far i love it

[Pete-eos]

Loving the look of this, its 2nd on my list after an UWA!

Read so many good reviews, the best thing was on another forum in a Tamron vs 17-40L, some guy posted test shots where the Tammy was easily as sharp if not sharper at the edge and centre and you got the Lemmings commenting 'the Canon is clear winner I see'... :lol:

Only fault with the lens is the slight AF noise but for the price its excellent.

[gdrMatt]

Only fault with the lens is the slight AF noise but for the price its excellent.

and it's only for crop censors cameras. if you step up to a 1D series body or still shoot film it won't work. :confused:

[Jakkin]

One more.

http://www.jakkin.ukfsn.org/Photos/11.02.2007%20-%20Night%20time%20Quayside/Bridge.14.02.2007.800.jpg

[pythagpython]

Jakkin, That is amazing. I like colors and the angle. I really like how the street lights on the left appear to be star-like objects. What PP did you do?