Reading mode: Light Dark

Tamron 17-50 2.8

Go to last post
N

Nik Hisham

Member
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Location
Kuala Lumpur, MY
Hi,

I'm thinking of buying this lens soon as an upgrade from my kit 18-55 IS. I'm looking forward to 2.8 capability across the focal length that it provides. However, I've not seen many comments or sample pics on this forum. So I'm curious if that means that not many people have bought it because its not a good lens. Also, I have a few other concerns.

1. Will this make my nifty 50 redundant?

2. I'm also worried about their after sales. My experience with Canon had me sending back 2 of 3 lenses I purchased for calibration due to focusing issues. I've had very good experience with Canon so far. Is the Tamron after sales any good? FWIW, I'm in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

3. Will 2.8 make up for lack of IS?

Thanks for any responses.
 
I have the Tamron 17-50 and really like it. It was the first lens I bought to replace the 400D kit lens (18-55). The Tamron is fast (2.8 fixed) and it has very good IQ in my opinion. Bokeh is pleasing and is a lens I use more often than either my Canon 70-300 IS or Nifty 50. I still use the 50 on occasion as it is better in low light than the Tamron but you need to move around more because of the fixed focal length.
--
Canon 40D Practicioner
 
I'll try to answer your questions.

Yes it's an upgrade compared to the 18-55 IS and the lens is quite sharp wide-open.

What do you mean not many comments? I can't come on here one day without reading about people loving the Tamron.

Nifty fifty.. don't compare apples to oranges mate. Firstly they're both different lenses as in one is a prime and the other a zoom. Secondly the zoom has a max aperture of 2.8 whilst the prime goes to 1.8. So for anything higher than 2.8 you'll need the nifty fifty anyway.

On the lack of IS. That depends. Do you shoot many lowlight scenes and if so what is the usual shutter time? I know from experience that when limited to f3.5 I can go as low as 1/15 and still get a decent picture without IS.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nilscroes/
 
Phacoid, Well said.

I have both the 17-50/2.8 and the thrifty-fifty and use the 17-50 much more due to the wide-end. That said, i love having the fast-1.8 lens in the bag when I need it. I would highly recommend the 17-50.

I can't speak to the IS issue - I don't have any IS-lenses (yet).
Phacoid said:
I'll try to answer your questions.

Yes it's an upgrade compared to the 18-55 IS and the lens is quite
sharp wide-open.

What do you mean not many comments? I can't come on here one day
without reading about people loving the Tamron.

Nifty fifty.. don't compare apples to oranges mate. Firstly they're
both different lenses as in one is a prime and the other a zoom.
Secondly the zoom has a max aperture of 2.8 whilst the prime goes to
1.8. So for anything higher than 2.8 you'll need the nifty fifty
anyway.

On the lack of IS. That depends. Do you shoot many lowlight scenes
and if so what is the usual shutter time? I know from experience that
when limited to f3.5 I can go as low as 1/15 and still get a decent
picture without IS.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nilscroes/
Click to expand...
 
Nik Hisham said:
Hi,

I'm thinking of buying this lens soon as an upgrade from my kit 18-55
IS. I'm looking forward to 2.8 capability across the focal length
that it provides. However, I've not seen many comments or sample
pics on this forum. So I'm curious if that means that not many
people have bought it because its not a good lens. Also, I have a
few other concerns.

1. Will this make my nifty 50 redundant?

2. I'm also worried about their after sales. My experience with
Canon had me sending back 2 of 3 lenses I purchased for calibration
due to focusing issues. I've had very good experience with Canon so
far. Is the Tamron after sales any good? FWIW, I'm in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia.

3. Will 2.8 make up for lack of IS?

Thanks for any responses.
Click to expand...
Love mine. I bought a XSi with 18-50mm f/5.6 IS, returned it because 40D with Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is way superior.

My sample photo:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewseekerman/1543280098/sizes/l/

And some other user samples:
http://www.dpchallenge.com/lens.php?LENS_ID=1333&view=submissions

--
Rod

40D, XTi cameras. Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS, Canon EF 85mm f/1.8, Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 and Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 MK (I).Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 SP and 90mm f/2.8 SP macro lenses.
 
I think the Tamron 17-50 2.8 is a great lens. I enjoy using it. It has great IQ and nice bookeh. Regarding IS I wouldn't mind having it but I can't say I miss it either. I usually

either take pictures with a short shutter time or use a tripod for night-photography.
 
For me, it replaced my nifty fifty.

My first copy failed (no autofocus) after a few months, and the supplier swicthed it out with no problems.

For me, f/2.8 is more important for IS.

Now had it for 2 years, and very happy.

Stuart
--
- -

 
Great Lens -- have had mine for 2 years. The wide angle (17mm) is really sharp, which is great for landscapes, and the 50mm has really nice boken when shooting portraits wide open.

I've used it on the 300D and 40D and have had no focusing issues. For the money, it's the best kit out there. Need more convincing -- just read the review on photozone.de

See my "landscapes" folder for sample shots.
--
http://wythe.zenfolio.com/
 
Nik Hisham said:
Hi,

I'm thinking of buying this lens soon as an upgrade from my kit 18-55
IS. I'm looking forward to 2.8 capability across the focal length
that it provides. However, I've not seen many comments or sample
pics on this forum. So I'm curious if that means that not many
people have bought it because its not a good lens. Also, I have a
few other concerns.

1. Will this make my nifty 50 redundant? - NO

2. I'm also worried about their after sales. My experience with
Canon had me sending back 2 of 3 lenses I purchased for calibration
due to focusing issues. I've had very good experience with Canon so
far. Is the Tamron after sales any good? FWIW, I'm in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia. - I DO NOT KNOW

3. Will 2.8 make up for lack of IS? - YES (I've never needed IS in a wide-angle lens myself)

Thanks for any responses.
--
Click to expand...
 
Phacoid said:
What do you mean not many comments? I can't come on here one day
without reading about people loving the Tamron.
Click to expand...
lol - I wish I could find some threads on this. I did a search for Tamron 17-50 and only had entries from threads about other lenses where someone made a comparison to the tamron.
Phacoid said:
Nifty fifty.. don't compare apples to oranges mate. Firstly they're
both different lenses as in one is a prime and the other a zoom.
Secondly the zoom has a max aperture of 2.8 whilst the prime goes to
1.8. So for anything higher than 2.8 you'll need the nifty fifty
anyway.
Click to expand...
Good point. But my 50 is kinda soft at 1.8 and plenty sharp at 2.8 (of course, I don't own any L stuff). If the tamron is just as sharp at 2.8, I was under the impression that I would no longer need to use my 50. But I suppose a soft pic at 1.8 in low light is better than a blurred pic.

Thanks for your feedback.
 
Scrubby said:
Nice find! However, there are only 47,611 results matching 17-50 =-)
Click to expand...
Yeah, and did you read any of them? I picked a handful at random (well, based on the preview) and there's not much to glean. My search was actually for "Tamron 17-50" and there are around 27000 ++ entries. Most of them are old. No pictures. If there are pics, its no longer there (photo has been deleted from photobucket). There is no indepth review. So I posted the question.

In anycase, I'm glad I did - great feedback from everyone.
 
Nik Hisham said:
Scrubby said:
Nice find! However, there are only 47,611 results matching 17-50 =-)
Click to expand...
Yeah, and did you read any of them? I picked a handful at random
(well, based on the preview) and there's not much to glean. My search
was actually for "Tamron 17-50" and there are around 27000 ++
entries. Most of them are old. No pictures. If there are pics, its
no longer there (photo has been deleted from photobucket). There is
no indepth review. So I posted the question.

In anycase, I'm glad I did - great feedback from everyone.
Click to expand...
Lol. I just realized that your 47k entries refers to the search results on flickr and my 27k refers to results on dpreview. I guess I'll be looking at those flickr photos for a bit... :)
 
I actually just got this lens today, ordered it last week. Got it for $259 brand new so i basically had to get it. Haven't really used it yet but plan to soon, going to Vegas next weekend so i will be using it all weekend while there.
 
Nik Hisham said:
1. Will this make my nifty 50 redundant?
Click to expand...
Up to a point. However, f/1.8 will let you shoot indoors without flash, which is really quite marginal at f/2.8. Also, the 50 is smaller and lighter, which can be desireable in some situations.
Nik Hisham said:
3. Will 2.8 make up for lack of IS?
Click to expand...
No. Nor vice versa. IS on a wide-angle lens is invaluable in certain situations, just as a fast aperture is invaluable in others. Basically, if the subject has a pulse, IS is not useful, if the subject is static (or you actually desire subject-motion blur) IS can work wonders.
 
I'm interesting in this lens too. How much is the price in KL and where can I buy it? How about the warranty preiod?

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top