Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

[robertwsimpson]

not too bad for f/2.8 and ISO3200. So glad I sent this lens back to Tamron to get recalibrated!

[boerewors]

Originally Posted by robertwsimpson

not too bad for f/2.8 and ISO3200. So glad I sent this lens back to Tamron to get recalibrated!

i just sent mine in for calibration. holding thumbs. getting it back next week

[graben]

I just love this lens. Not so shabby for macro if I do say. This frog was about as wide as the lens itself so about 67mm. I was also able to auto focus from very close. My lens hood was almost touching the frog.


_MG_0199 by tkdgraben, on Flickr



And a 100% crop



100 percent crop by tkdgraben, on Flickr

[robertwsimpson]

Originally Posted by boerewors

i just sent mine in for calibration. holding thumbs. getting it back next week

My wife is from SA and I've never heard her say "holding thumbs." I have to use that on her and surprise her.

[robertwsimpson]

180 deg panorama in Labadee Haiti


Labadee balcony view by robertwsimpson, on Flickr

[motofotog]

Originally Posted by robertwsimpson

180 deg panorama in Labadee Haiti


Labadee balcony view by robertwsimpson, on Flickr

nice picture & beautiful colour, how many pictures did you take for this panorama?

[robertwsimpson]

not sure... here is another one taken in mexico. This one is 9 I think, so the Haiti one is probably the same.



Cozumel Panorama by robertwsimpson, on Flickr

[motofotog]

guys need some help, planning to buy this lens tomorrow. any specific test that i need to do at the shop before buying. I have a 40D body

[Davivascaino]

Guys, which one would you prefer:
this lens or the sigma 17-50?

and other question: Most of the users here are using the Non-VC one. However, the VC one is 200 bucks more expensive. DO you think it is worth it? Thanks

[robertwsimpson]

Originally Posted by motofotog

guys need some help, planning to buy this lens tomorrow. any specific test that i need to do at the shop before buying. I have a 40D body

are you buying it new? If so, cuddle with your 6 year warranty and don't worry about testing it at the store.

[Jelloneck]

Originally Posted by Davivascaino

Most of the users here are using the Non-VC one. However, the VC one is 200 bucks more expensive. DO you think it is worth it? Thanks

I was debating between the VC and Non-VC and ultimately went with the Non-VC. I heard the non-vc is sharper and at this focal length I dont see a reason to worry about having the VC.

[Davivascaino]

Originally Posted by Jelloneck

I was debating between the VC and Non-VC and ultimately went with the Non-VC. I heard the non-vc is sharper and at this focal length I dont see a reason to worry about having the VC.

So you guys take pictures handheld even with non-vc lens? I mean, if you are taking pictures indoor, you will eventually need a tripod right?

My fear of buying a non-vc is that my hands are not surgeon hands,

[robertwsimpson]

I bought the non-vc version because I don't plan on keeping this lens forever, and mine was cheaper. Sometimes I do miss having some sort of image stabilization, but with the f/2.8 and the cheap price tag, it's a no brainer in my opinion. As mentioned, at this focal length, you don't need surgeon hands. at 17mm, anyone should be able to hand hold at about 1/30 sec. I can go even lower than that on a good day.

[Bobster]

Originally Posted by Davivascaino

So you guys take pictures handheld even with non-vc lens? I mean, if you are taking pictures indoor, you will eventually need a tripod right?

My fear of buying a non-vc is that my hands are not surgeon hands,

thats what ISO is for - bump the iso, open her up to 2.8 and shoot away

ISO6400, 2.8, 1/100

[motofotog]

Originally Posted by robertwsimpson

are you buying it new? If so, cuddle with your 6 year warranty and don't worry about testing it at the store.

Thanks, I am buying new, here in India we get only 2 year warranty