Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 05 Jun 2009 (Friday) 17:41
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "After the move from a Tam17-50 to a Can17-55, what's ur change in keeper rate? f2.8-4"
Keeper rate decreased
0
0%
Keeper rate didn't change
4
28.6%
Keeper rate increased a little bit
7
50%
Keeper rate increased a lot
3
21.4%

14 voters, 14 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Am I asking too much from a 17-50 2.8?

 
verdantsound
Senior Member
Avatar
272 posts
Joined Sep 2008
     
Jun 05, 2009 17:41 |  #1

I've had my tamron 17-50 ever since the end of December, and I'm still a little uneasy about using it. Even though it has become my primary walk around lens, it didn't blow me away as did the tokina 12-24 from my Canon 28-105. I also don't really see the IQ upgrade from my tokina as much.

I'd say 50% of my pics are softer than I would have liked them to be. And most of the time I find that I had to focus more than once, which I find annoying. Dim light is annoying as well. Note: I usually use between f2.8 and 4.5.

Am I correct in assuming that the Canon 17-55 has a much more accurate autofocus, can better focus in low light, and greater IQ (or if not IQ, that the Canon can achieve the high IQ with a significantly greater frequency)? If so, I may just sell all my gear save the drainpipe to fund the 17-55.

Minor note: Another thread is about purple fringing problems of the Canon. Is it more or less than the tamron?

Basically: How much would my pics improve if I had shot the same settings in Canon? I know these aren't real "tests," but the fact that I have them do mean something. These are straight jpgs out of the camera. Are these sharp? Can they be sharper with the Canon?

@17mm f2.8 1/5


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


T2i
Sigma 30mm f1.4, Canon 80-200mm f/2.8L, Tamron 17-50mm, Canon 100mm f2.0 550 EX Flash
Budget: College Kid

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
verdantsound
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
272 posts
Joined Sep 2008
     
Jun 05, 2009 17:47 |  #2

@35mm f/4 1/125


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


T2i
Sigma 30mm f1.4, Canon 80-200mm f/2.8L, Tamron 17-50mm, Canon 100mm f2.0 550 EX Flash
Budget: College Kid

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
verdantsound
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
272 posts
Joined Sep 2008
     
Jun 05, 2009 17:49 as a reply to  @ verdantsound's post |  #3

@ 34mm f2.8 1/200


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


T2i
Sigma 30mm f1.4, Canon 80-200mm f/2.8L, Tamron 17-50mm, Canon 100mm f2.0 550 EX Flash
Budget: College Kid

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joshv123
Member
32 posts
Joined Feb 2009
     
Jun 05, 2009 18:00 as a reply to  @ verdantsound's post |  #4

The most noticeable thing about the samples that you've posted is the amount of noise- are you using a high ISO? It's difficult to tell if lens sharpness issues exist with that level of noise.

If you're finding that you need to use ISO 1600+ with F2.8, it might be worth using the 50 listed in your signature a little more often or, if that's not a focal length that works for you, investing in a different fast prime.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
psxindo
Senior Member
419 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
     
Jun 05, 2009 18:10 |  #5

My guess is the high ISO...

I have the same lens and loved it... I too find it soft when using high ISO... but at lower ISO and good shutter speed, this lens is sharp..

I might be selling mine because I'm getting a 5DII... also the only thing I don't like is lack of USM... this lens is loud... especially during weddings...


5D mkIII | 5D mkII | 6D | EOS M | 16-35L | 24-70L | 70-200L 2.8 IS mkII | EF-M 22 | 50 1.4 | 85L | 100 2.8 macro | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | 2x 580 ex II | 580 ex | 2x sunpak 383 | 134GB CF |
Wishlist | 14L | 24L | 35L | 50L | 100L macro | 135L | 15 2.8 FE | 17L 4 TS | 45 2.8 TS | 90 2.8 TS |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
danchee
Member
42 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Jun 05, 2009 18:12 |  #6

The Exif says you're using a Rebel XT at ISO800. That's quite noisy to my eyes. Also hand-holding at 1/5 shutter is not going to produce the sharpest image either. I don't know about you but I can't keep my hands steady enough to get stable shots at anything less that 1/125 without IS.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
verdantsound
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
272 posts
Joined Sep 2008
     
Jun 05, 2009 18:15 |  #7

Yeah, most of my indoor non-flash shots are actually ISO 800-1600 =/

So I assume the IS would help the 1/5, and because of the IS, I would also be able to use a lower ISO, thus obtaining sharper images?

Are the last two sharp?

All crops are at 100%


T2i
Sigma 30mm f1.4, Canon 80-200mm f/2.8L, Tamron 17-50mm, Canon 100mm f2.0 550 EX Flash
Budget: College Kid

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
toxic
Goldmember
3,498 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2008
Location: California
     
Jun 05, 2009 18:35 |  #8

1: motion blur (camera shake)
2: not sure; probably high ISO, possibility of camera shake
3: motion blur (subject motion), maybe misfocus?

All images are softer at high ISOs




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jun 05, 2009 18:36 |  #9

IS will help with your unsteadiness but will do nothing for subject motion.

Expecting to get a shot of someone at 1/5s and expecting it to be sharp is asking for more than is reasonably attainable.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
strobe ­ monkey
Goldmember
Avatar
1,234 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Arizona
     
Jun 05, 2009 20:22 |  #10

I used to have the tamron 17-50 and loved it.

Test a non moving subject, say a page of news paper, then use a tripod, mirror lockup, remote or timer, iso 100.


6D, 7D, EF35 f2, EF50 f1.4, EF50 f1.8
Sold:
EF 70-200 F4, EF 24-105L, EF 24-70L, EF 17-40L, EF 85 f1.8, Stigma 10-20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mahoro
Member
196 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Toronto, Centre of the Universe
     
Jun 05, 2009 20:26 |  #11

Knowledge doesn't come w/ equipment upgrade....


XSI , 18-55IS, Sigma 30mm F/1.4, , EF-S 60mm, 80-200F2.8L, Sigma 400mm APO F/5.6, 550EX, Velbon 5300 CF Tripod

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
infinite012
Senior Member
Avatar
602 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Sterling, VA
     
Jun 05, 2009 22:20 |  #12

Use a much higher ISO to get your shutter speed higher! That's the only way to avoid the subject blur you have in your pictures.


Michael
My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
verdantsound
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
272 posts
Joined Sep 2008
     
Jun 05, 2009 22:26 |  #13

infinite012 wrote in post #8058550 (external link)
Use a much higher ISO to get your shutter speed higher! That's the only way to avoid the subject blur you have in your pictures.

my ISO's at 800 already.


T2i
Sigma 30mm f1.4, Canon 80-200mm f/2.8L, Tamron 17-50mm, Canon 100mm f2.0 550 EX Flash
Budget: College Kid

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Super-Nicko
Goldmember
Avatar
1,652 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
     
Jun 05, 2009 23:26 |  #14

I think you are probably asking a bit much from your lens and camera here -

I think the canon IS would help you to a degree BUT it wont let more light in - it wont bump your shutter speed - so not only are the shots struggling with high ISO and in some cases waaaay low shutter speed (i wont shoot 24-70 at 2.8 below 1/60) and even then the softness shows... more light shows sharpness more... they look a tad underexposed first and third - which shows noise even more!

All cases you showed me i KNOW i would be shooting f1.4-f2.0 and find unless filling with flash - 2.8 really can be useless in alot of indoor no flash scenarios.


My gallery - just posted some of my top shots (external link)
1DmkIII / 5DMKII [50mm f1.4] [85mm f1.8] [100mm f2.8 MACRO] [17-40mm f/4L] [24-70mm f/2.8L USM] [24-105mm f/4L IS USM] [COLOR=black][COLOR=bl​ack][[COLOR=black]100-400mm f/4.5-f 5.6L IS USM] Canon 1.4xII - Speedlite 580EXII - EPSON P-5000 - Lowepro Bags - Manfrotto 682B Monopod & 055XproB Tripod - 488RC2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cedm
Senior Member
628 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Feb 2008
Location: KL, Malaysia
     
Jun 06, 2009 02:10 |  #15

verdantsound wrote in post #8057547 (external link)
Yeah, most of my indoor non-flash shots are actually ISO 800-1600 =/

So I assume the IS would help the 1/5, and because of the IS, I would also be able to use a lower ISO, thus obtaining sharper images?

Are the last two sharp?

All crops are at 100%


Your sig says you have a Speedlite flash. Why don't you use it more often? From the samples you posted above, all are in poor light conditions. Since I bought a speedlite, my indoor/low light pictures dramatically improved.

If I were you, I'd try to shoot ISO 400 and bounce the flash off the ceiling before I consider buying another lens.

And how happy are you with your Tamron shooting outdoor in broad daylight at low ISO? It should give you much sharper results. Mine is doing great with plenty enough light.


My gear: EOS 60D | EF-S 10-18 STM | Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 | EF-S 24 STM | EF 50 F/1.8 | EF-S 55-250 IS | EF 100 F/2.8 macro | 430EX.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,378 views & 0 likes for this thread
Am I asking too much from a 17-50 2.8?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is dayuan99
708 guests, 226 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.