some pictures from an event i had...with the 17-55
Nov 16, 2015 18:02 as a reply to barsoum's post |
Pentax Spotmatic F with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 50/1.8, 135/3.5; Canon digital gear
Nov 16, 2015 21:09 as a reply to Archibald's post |
yeah, been done a million times, but brides see it and just fall in love with it.
Love this lens, but it just isn't getting used anymore now that I have a 6D...
A couple more...
Joined Nov 2007
I currently have the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC, I find that SOOC it tends to be lacking contrast and saturation, yes this can be corrected in PP but I wondered if anyone had compared to the Canon? The other negative is it is beautifully sharp from F4 onwards but very soft at 50mm and F2.8, how is the Canon in this situation?
Canon 60D; Canon 10-18 IS STM; Tamron 17-50 VC; Canon 100mm F2.8L macro; Tamron 60mm F2 macro; Tamron 70-300 VC USD; Canon 430ex II; Yongnuo 565ex; Manfrotto 190 classic; Manfrotto 488RC2; Hama Rexton 150; Manfrotto backpack & Eager to learn
Jan 22, 2016 09:02 as a reply to vickylou's post |
I've had the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC and the Canon 17-55 when I had my 60D & 70D. My copy of the Tamron was nicely sharp throughout the focal length and pretty good throughout the aperture range. Everyone seems to say the non-VC version had better sharpness. I eventually sold my Tamron and moved up to the Canon for the IS. I suppose the Canon gave the best of both, good sharpness and image stabilization. When comparing the two lenses side-by-side, I did not notice any significant lack of contrast or saturation from the Tamron. However, Canon lenses are known for having good contrast and saturation compared to Sigma and Tamron so it wouldn't surprise me if those characteristics were a little better on the Canon lens.
EOS 6D MkII, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, 85 1.8, 70-200L f/4 IS, 16-35 f/4L IS, 430 EXII, Luma Cinch Strap
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.07s
|Latest registered member is apemusgrave|
797 guests, 395 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017