Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EF and EF-S Lenses > Lens Sample Photo Archive
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 29th of August 2006 (Tue)   #1
Stan43
Senior Member
 
Stan43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 1,196
Default Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

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.
__________________
Canon 5DMK3,1DMK4, 5DMK2,1DMK3 5D , Fujifilm 1-EX,Olympus Pen E-PL2,Carl Zeiss 100 F/2 Makro Planar ZE, Carl Zeiss 21 F/2.8 Distagon T*ZE,Carl Zeiss 50 F/2 MP ZE, 35 1.4L , Tokina 16-28 2.8, 24-70 2.8L, 24-105L,85 1.2L II ,70-200 2.8L ISII,100-400L IS ,15 2.8 Fisheye, 580(2) ,430 EX, TC 1.4, fujifilm x-E1/ 35 1.4 , fujifilm X-E2, Fuji XT1,
Fuji 35 1.4' fuji 18-55, Fuji 55-200,fuji 56 1.2, Zeiss 50 2.8 Touit
Stan43 is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 29th of August 2006 (Tue)   #2
Guineh
I've been wisdom free for about 10 years, now.
 
Guineh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: In a gilded cage
Posts: 9,030
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler - Albert Einstein
7D, 40D, Sigma 10-20 EX HSM, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 SP XR Di II, EF 50 F1.8, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS, Sigma 1.4x TC, Kenko Tubes, Sigma EF-500 DG ST Flash
Flickr - Blog
Guineh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th of August 2006 (Tue)   #3
Tee Why
"Monkey's uncle"
 
Tee Why's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 10,595
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Gallery: http://tomyi.smugmug.com/


Tee Why is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 29th of August 2006 (Tue)   #4
Stan43
Senior Member
 
Stan43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 1,196
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Canon 5DMK3,1DMK4, 5DMK2,1DMK3 5D , Fujifilm 1-EX,Olympus Pen E-PL2,Carl Zeiss 100 F/2 Makro Planar ZE, Carl Zeiss 21 F/2.8 Distagon T*ZE,Carl Zeiss 50 F/2 MP ZE, 35 1.4L , Tokina 16-28 2.8, 24-70 2.8L, 24-105L,85 1.2L II ,70-200 2.8L ISII,100-400L IS ,15 2.8 Fisheye, 580(2) ,430 EX, TC 1.4, fujifilm x-E1/ 35 1.4 , fujifilm X-E2, Fuji XT1,
Fuji 35 1.4' fuji 18-55, Fuji 55-200,fuji 56 1.2, Zeiss 50 2.8 Touit
Stan43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th of August 2006 (Tue)   #5
Tee Why
"Monkey's uncle"
 
Tee Why's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 10,595
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Gallery: http://tomyi.smugmug.com/


Tee Why is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th of August 2006 (Tue)   #6
us_navyls
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tee Why

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
us_navyls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th of August 2006 (Tue)   #7
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
 
LightRules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 9,902
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

Quote:
Originally Posted by us_navyls
maybe it is because I've never had an L so I don't know really the difference



Last edited by LightRules : 29th of August 2006 (Tue) at 23:54.
LightRules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th of August 2006 (Tue)   #8
Stan43
Senior Member
 
Stan43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 1,196
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Canon 5DMK3,1DMK4, 5DMK2,1DMK3 5D , Fujifilm 1-EX,Olympus Pen E-PL2,Carl Zeiss 100 F/2 Makro Planar ZE, Carl Zeiss 21 F/2.8 Distagon T*ZE,Carl Zeiss 50 F/2 MP ZE, 35 1.4L , Tokina 16-28 2.8, 24-70 2.8L, 24-105L,85 1.2L II ,70-200 2.8L ISII,100-400L IS ,15 2.8 Fisheye, 580(2) ,430 EX, TC 1.4, fujifilm x-E1/ 35 1.4 , fujifilm X-E2, Fuji XT1,
Fuji 35 1.4' fuji 18-55, Fuji 55-200,fuji 56 1.2, Zeiss 50 2.8 Touit
Stan43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of August 2006 (Wed)   #9
Tee Why
"Monkey's uncle"
 
Tee Why's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 10,595
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Gallery: http://tomyi.smugmug.com/


Tee Why is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of August 2006 (Wed)   #10
dave_bass5
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London, centre of the universe
Posts: 4,067
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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
__________________
Dave.
Gallery@http://www.flickr.com/photos/davebass5/
Canon 5DMKIII |Canon 650D | Canon 24-70 f/2.8L MKII | Canon 70-200 f/4L IS | 100 f/2 USM | 50 f/1.4 | 40 f/2.8 STM | 35mm f/2 IS | Canon S110 | Fuji F31FD | Canon 580EXII, 270EXII | Yongnuo YN-622C Triggers.
dave_bass5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of August 2006 (Wed)   #11
grego
Cream of the Crop
 
grego's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UCLA
Posts: 8,819
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=141406
__________________
Go UCLA!! |Gear|SportsShooter|Flickr|

Last edited by grego : 30th of August 2006 (Wed) at 05:09.
grego is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of August 2006 (Wed)   #12
dave_bass5
Goldmember
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London, centre of the universe
Posts: 4,067
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

Good idea
Heres one i like. not a great comp but nice and sharp
__________________
Dave.
Gallery@http://www.flickr.com/photos/davebass5/
Canon 5DMKIII |Canon 650D | Canon 24-70 f/2.8L MKII | Canon 70-200 f/4L IS | 100 f/2 USM | 50 f/1.4 | 40 f/2.8 STM | 35mm f/2 IS | Canon S110 | Fuji F31FD | Canon 580EXII, 270EXII | Yongnuo YN-622C Triggers.
dave_bass5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of August 2006 (Wed)   #13
Jman13
Cream of the Crop
 
Jman13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 5,558
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Jordan Steele - http://www.jordansteele.com
Admiring Light - http://www.admiringlight.com
Jman13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of August 2006 (Wed)   #14
YARRO
Member
 
YARRO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Assen, The Netherlands
Posts: 201
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Canon 50D + Grip, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L, Canon EF 70-300mm IS USM, Tamron AF17-50MM F/2.8, Canon Speedlite 430 EX + Lumiquest Big Bounce, Gitzo G1564L Monopod + Manfrotto 468 MG RC-0 hydro ballhead, Canon RC RS-80N3, Lowepro Slingshot 200AW.
YARRO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of August 2006 (Wed)   #15
Tee Why
"Monkey's uncle"
 
Tee Why's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 10,595
Default Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8

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.
__________________
Gallery: http://tomyi.smugmug.com/


Tee Why is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tamron 17-35mm + 28-75mm vs. Tamron 17~70mm or 17~50mm dr_who Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 3 11th of March 2012 (Sun) 05:03
Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 vs Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 - Need your quik opinions please! Josh V Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 10 6th of August 2008 (Wed) 13:59
WTB: Sigma 18-50mm MACRO or Tamron 17-50mm mama_destiny Classifieds: Buy 0 10th of October 2007 (Wed) 18:08
WTB: Tamron 17-50mm, 1.4X Tamron/Kenko Teleplus Pro 300 TC fuzzybabybunny Classifieds: Buy 0 19th of February 2007 (Mon) 03:27


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:17.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.