Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

I own a 30D and the Tamron 17-50 since 2 months. First DSLR, so I've still to learn
Anyway, I'm quite impressed by the sharpness of your pictures.
Crucial question: do you add post sharpness in Photoshop or so on? I think particularly of your picture of the Frontenac castle, pm_john. Or is it the resize?

My sample do not seem to be so sharp. It is ok, but not extreme sharp.
Your point of view will be welcome with the last pictures I've shoot on Sunday in my gallery like this one @F/5.6,

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Looks like it's a bit OOF.

Yes, I do a little more sharpening PP.

I just ordered the lens today..should be here by monday. Ill post pics as soon as I can to give an idea of IQ and all that goodness.

^^^ nice shots

I would be interested in know from here on in which version everybody received (that way I can really see if it makes a difference in terms of quality).

By version, I mean "Made in Japan" or "Made in China".

I'll start, my version is a "Japan" version, pretty much every pic in my horrible Picasa gallery (see last line link in my sig) was taken with it (I only say horrible, b/c I'm horrible; my equipment is far more capable than I).

Eric B wrote in post #4129791
I own a 30D and the Tamron 17-50 since 2 months. First DSLR, so I've still to learn
Anyway, I'm quite impressed by the sharpness of your pictures.
Crucial question: do you add post sharpness in Photoshop or so on? I think particularly of your picture of the Frontenac castle, pm_john. Or is it the resize?

Yes, I only add sharpness in PS, the picture was also resized to fit screen. I like your first pic, its very sharp!

so heres a shot I took of my cat today. The lens just came it. I put the filter on it, put it on the camera and took a few shots. I adjusted the thresholds in PS and did a bit of USM and resized. Thats it.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Finally got rid of it , it is a good lens but not for serious work due to its distortion at 17mm and CA.

Now , I only buy Canon zooms and Pentax lenses primes.

if you guys love primes , should try the K10D.

Suddenly, all your primes are stabilized.

For landscapes and portraits where you do not need corrected lens , you won't need the 17-55IS or 10-22 , but when you shoot in door or buildings art museum etc for sale, you will need them.

The 17-55f2.8IS is not sharper than the Tamorn but is more corrected and more resistant to flares that is what you are paying premium price for.

So if you are looking for a sharpest std zoom , stick with the Tamorn no need to pay alot more for the Canon , but for those looking for more corrected lens with less pronounced CA , then get the Canon ........you wont regret it.

I just LOOVE this lens, quick and sharp, a bit musical, but after a few sessions I started to love it!)))
Some Pics taken with it:

I just got this lens.
It's pretty sharp and it's good having the constant F/2.8 from 17-50mm.

The AF motor is a bit whiny, but it's a nice lens. Liking it so far.

felt like contributing to this thread, since the reason i got this lens was because of this thread and other reviews. here are a few.

1.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Few from an air show I went to yesterday.

Aerobatics

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

wow, that airshow picture is stellar!

Another quick shot of my cat. This was taken at 39mm, f/3.2, ISO 200, 1/160 with bounced flash: