Reading mode: Light Dark

optimal walk-around for my a57...

Go to last post
U

unravel

Well-known member
Messages
234
Reaction score
16
Well guys, my birthday is coming up soon + im trying to sell some stuff from my other hobbies.. which all means i think it stime to get a good walk around lens

My options/choices

tamron 17-50 f2.8 ($350? used) - hearing some mixed reviews, constant aperture of 2.8 sounds great, price is very attractive (very attractive)

sony 16-50 f2.8 ($600 used) - im worried that this will outperform my 16mp sensor so to speak, would my a57 bottleneck it? Will this lens be too heavy and awkward on my a57 as well, i actually saw it in store and was really surprised at how large it was

CZ 16-80 ($700ish used?) - really stretching my budget here, but it would be nice to own a zeiss. Hearing some mixed reviews on this one though. It is longer which is definitely nice however it is a slow lens

So what do you guys think.. will i really see a difference between 16-50 sony and 17-50 tamron on my a57? Etc

Thank you!
 
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 has been my main lens on my a55 for the past two years. I do lot of shooting indoors and in available light, and it's really just been a perfect fit for the camera. I sometimes use a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 prime when I have really low-light situations or for some portraits, and occasionally use a bigger zoom lens (I have two longer lenses), but really the Tamron has been the one that I just put on and use in situation after situation.

--
Jeremy Birn
 
unravel said:
Well guys, my birthday is coming up soon + im trying to sell some stuff from my other hobbies.. which all means i think it stime to get a good walk around lens

My options/choices

tamron 17-50 f2.8 ($350? used) - hearing some mixed reviews, constant aperture of 2.8 sounds great, price is very attractive (very attractive)
Click to expand...
I wasn't impressed with this lens. I've had one to try, but it had back focus problems.
unravel said:
sony 16-50 f2.8 ($600 used) - im worried that this will outperform my 16mp sensor so to speak, would my a57 bottleneck it?
Click to expand...
I'd rather have a lens out perform the sensor than the other way. What is meant by "bottleneck"?
unravel said:
Will this lens be too heavy and awkward on my a57 as well, i actually saw it in store and was really surprised at how large it was
Click to expand...
This lens is bulky and makes the camera feel front-heavy compared the CZ 16-80.
unravel said:
CZ 16-80 ($700ish used?) - really stretching my budget here, but it would be nice to own a zeiss. Hearing some mixed reviews on this one though. It is longer which is definitely nice however it is a slow lens
Click to expand...
If getting a used one, make sure you inspect it well before buying. If you are using this as a "walk-around" outdoors, I wouldn't worry about the smaller aperture.
unravel said:
So what do you guys think.. will i really see a difference between 16-50 sony and 17-50 tamron on my a57? Etc

Thank you!
Click to expand...
As a "walk-around", I'd prefer the CZ 16-80 for the extra range over the other two choices. Also, it is lighter and not at as bulky as the 16-50/2.8.
 
I have a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 lens and am very happy with it. I took it (along with my SLT-A55, a small Giotto rocket blower, and an extra battery and memory card) in a small three compartment Domke bag on a vacation trip to Louisiana and Texas last May. (I also took a battery charger but left it in my suitcase.)

I found the A55 and 17-50 to be a manageable combo to carry around all day, even in the 90+ degree heat. I took photos (predominantly stills, but also a few videos) in a variety of environments ranging from inside old churches using available light, to sunny outdoor scenes, to a dimly lighted aquarium, as well as a carnival at night. The pics all turned out great. I did not at any time find myself inconvenienced or at a disadvantage because I only had the one lens. The 17-50 is admittedly quite a bit heavier than the 17-55 kit lens, but the f/2.8 allowed me to do so much more (see prior comments about dimly lighted environments).

PS. I realize the original post had to do with an A57, but an A57 is not THAT much larger or heavier than an A55. I have an A57 now, and it and the Tamron lens fit just fine in the same Domke bag.

--
Tom
 
I tested a Sony 16-50 in a store, and for a carry around lens, it felt too heavy for me. That said, someday I wouldn't mine owning it, but for now I passed.

I went with the Tamron 17-50 and have loved it. It "feels" good and I've been very satisfied with the pictures from it. The $200+ savings was appreciated too.

Haven't tried the CZ. Couldn't justify the diff for not having f/2.8. (I do more low-light/low-key shooting)
 
I really love the tamron 17-50 for its price ($300 used), sony 16-50 and CZ 16-80 both are so attractive for their actual quality, that kind of 3d pop i think i see in pictures taken with them.. i just dont see it in the tamron samples... however the 16-50 is too short for me i think and the CZ 16-80 makes me wary of buying used due to its build issues...

however what about sigma 17-70 DC macro 2.8-4?

It does have an attractive range, even some macro capability, and open wide its a fast lens. However i cannot seem to find a conclusion of its sharpness, color rendition, etc. What do you guys think?
 
Just fyi I have seen several cz 16-80s popping up on dyxum for around $600.
I love my 16-50 though and highly recommend it :)
 
the tamron would probably serve you nicely since you shoot alot of available light pics keep looking at samples of lens pics,reviews then decide,..you may find something else along the way good luck brian
 
From my own experience with Canon L lenses I found that when using a full frame camera such as the 5DMK2 their was an increase with distortion at the edges which did not appear with my smaller sensored 30D also comparing the L lens versus a standard lens on the 30D their was very little if any difference in image quality as the smaller sensor did not use the full width of the L glass but only the sweet spot.

My advice dont waste money on buying expensive lenses for the small sensored cameras.
 
rented the 16-80CZ and that was all she wrote. i got one and will not look back
before that i was a simple guy and had a 30mm 2.8 macro as my walk around

now what i take on the hikes are the 16-80 and 70-200 tamron 2.8 + 2x converter (what i have on the cam or in the pack depends on the chances of wildlife ) most the tiem its the 70-200 + converter but if the canapy is thick and im in low light i use the tamron withought 2xer whenn i know most the shots will be landscape the 16-80 is mounted

ether way i dont leave home withought both of them and myb A330 (let me know how you like that A57 as im thinking abut getting one as a 2nd body )
 
thubleau7 said:
From my own experience with Canon L lenses I found that when using a full frame camera such as the 5DMK2 their was an increase with distortion at the edges which did not appear with my smaller sensored 30D also comparing the L lens versus a standard lens on the 30D their was very little if any difference in image quality as the smaller sensor did not use the full width of the L glass but only the sweet spot.

My advice dont waste money on buying expensive lenses for the small sensored cameras.
Click to expand...
very interesting advice, makes me lean towards sony 16-50 to be honest.. i just know i will feel crippled with that range haha

oh and to the poster above, i love my a57--only one gripe is not being able to adjust the auto iso range.. but other than that i love it
 
Hello

I got my a57 one week ago, and im just getting used to it.

I'v had the Tamron 17-50 for about a year (on my old a200). It's an ok lens, but it is very plasticy, and the feeling of the zoomring is unsmooth (somtimes stuttering), and at 50mm, f2.8 i think et is a little soft. But over all, the price for this lens in mind, I think it's the best lens for casual everyday use.

Otherwise look at the Sigma 17-70 without HSM, it's also very chep, not f2.8 all the way, but i think the qualityfeeling of the lens is better than the Tamron, and the picturequality is almost the same.

Allan
 
My Tamron 17-50 lives on my a57. In have plenty to choose from, but this one's the winner.
--
Ian
 
Underrated, a very good lens with one of the best zoom ranges. Doesn't have any of the problems of the CZ16-80mm.
 
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