Tamron 17-28mm user experience

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
Critical Thinker Regular Member • Posts: 415
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience
1

alan simpson wrote:

I had the Tamron 17-28 a few weeks ago, I returned as I did not like build quality.

The photos were ok, a few out of focus but generally good.

Nice lens to use but it felt very 'plasticky' and cheap (which it is not).

I now have the 16-35 f4 Sony which I really like.

Yeah, the Tamron 17-28 is very plasticky and cheap feeling. But thats intentional because its supposed to be a more affordable wide angle zoom so of course it wont have the much better build quality of the 16-35/4 for example.

voronspb Senior Member • Posts: 1,541
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience
3

Critical Thinker wrote:

Yeah, the Tamron 17-28 is very plasticky and cheap feeling. But thats intentional because its supposed to be a more affordable wide angle zoom so of course it wont have the much better build quality of the 16-35/4 for example.

The outer shell material and lens weight aren't connected to the lens reliability in any way. Even in seemingly all-metal lens there's more than enough potential failure points - a drop of glue holding some element, or tiny electronic sensor/actuator, or under-designed mechanical part (like in FE70-200GM).

Anyway most modern lenses are all-plastic inside, regardless of outer body material. As an example, E16-50PZ ($300 in retail box) has metal shell which wobbles in relation to the lens mount, and inner barrel wobbles in relation to everything else.

Tamron 17-28 feels cheap by touch, but it's built tightly, with proper tolerances.

-- hide signature --

Vladimir Gorbunov

 voronspb's gear list:voronspb's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony a7 III Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD +4 more
Critical Thinker Regular Member • Posts: 415
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience
1

voronspb wrote:

Critical Thinker wrote:

Yeah, the Tamron 17-28 is very plasticky and cheap feeling. But thats intentional because its supposed to be a more affordable wide angle zoom so of course it wont have the much better build quality of the 16-35/4 for example.

The outer shell material and lens weight aren't connected to the lens reliability in any way. Even in seemingly all-metal lens there's more than enough potential failure points - a drop of glue holding some element, or tiny electronic sensor/actuator, or under-designed mechanical part (like in FE70-200GM).

Anyway most modern lenses are all-plastic inside, regardless of outer body material. As an example, E16-50PZ ($300 in retail box) has metal shell which wobbles in relation to the lens mount, and inner barrel wobbles in relation to everything else.

Tamron 17-28 feels cheap by touch, but it's built tightly, with proper tolerances.

Thats exactly what I said, it feels cheap and plasticky.

Also the 16-50 is more like a $50 lens and the build quality is abysmal. Its an entry level kit lens.

MedicineMan999
MedicineMan999 Senior Member • Posts: 1,671
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience
5

All opinion and greatly subjective.

I've got a few lenses, and a few 'good' ones.

I carried and used the 17-28 daily for a month. Never did I feel it was cheap or plastic feeling. I felt it was fast, sharp, and most important to me, lightweight.

I do know plastic has way way many advantages over metal so I don't judge the book by the cover.

 MedicineMan999's gear list:MedicineMan999's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Olympus Tough TG-3 Panasonic FZ1000 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX80 Sony RX100 V +57 more
noggin2k1
noggin2k1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,450
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience
1

Critical Thinker wrote:

voronspb wrote:

Critical Thinker wrote:

Yeah, the Tamron 17-28 is very plasticky and cheap feeling. But thats intentional because its supposed to be a more affordable wide angle zoom so of course it wont have the much better build quality of the 16-35/4 for example.

The outer shell material and lens weight aren't connected to the lens reliability in any way. Even in seemingly all-metal lens there's more than enough potential failure points - a drop of glue holding some element, or tiny electronic sensor/actuator, or under-designed mechanical part (like in FE70-200GM).

Anyway most modern lenses are all-plastic inside, regardless of outer body material. As an example, E16-50PZ ($300 in retail box) has metal shell which wobbles in relation to the lens mount, and inner barrel wobbles in relation to everything else.

Tamron 17-28 feels cheap by touch, but it's built tightly, with proper tolerances.

Thats exactly what I said, it feels cheap and plasticky.

Also the 16-50 is more like a $50 lens and the build quality is abysmal. Its an entry level kit lens.

I'm going to disagree with you on the "cheap" feeling here.

I'm holding it side-by-side to my GM lenses - yes the plastic feels different, but it definitely doesn't feel cheap.

The construction is very solid, and well put together.

Something like the Canon 35/2 on the other hand, now that's a cheap feeling lens. Big variations in gaps between the plastic, and significant flex when squeezing the lens barrel..

 noggin2k1's gear list:noggin2k1's gear list
Sony a9 Sony a7 III Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM Sony FE 85mm F1.8 +6 more
voronspb Senior Member • Posts: 1,541
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience
1

I'd have always preferred the plastic-body lens (provided that it's built tightly) with good optics over the one with glorious finish and so-so optical performance. Anyway, the Tamron 17-28 is built far better and from better materials than non-L Canon lenses.

-- hide signature --

Vladimir Gorbunov

 voronspb's gear list:voronspb's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony a7 III Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD +4 more
voronspb Senior Member • Posts: 1,541
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience

noggin2k1 wrote:

I'm holding it side-by-side to my GM lenses - yes the plastic feels different, but it definitely doesn't feel cheap.

It's just plain black plastic. Many premium-grade lenses utilize plastic in outer body, but often it has some decorative finish to create a "premium" feeling. Many Sony lenses feel more "expensive" because of metal outer shells, even in some really cheap models.

But this doesn't relate at all to optical quality or reliability.

-- hide signature --

Vladimir Gorbunov

 voronspb's gear list:voronspb's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony a7 III Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD +4 more
Mike Fouc Regular Member • Posts: 314
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience

That’s my travel setup too.

 Mike Fouc's gear list:Mike Fouc's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G OSS Samyang AF 35mm F2.8 FE Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 III +8 more
Pure Photo NI
Pure Photo NI Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience

I have found the Tamron to be very good, I swapped my Sony 16-35 f/4 for it. A.F is very good and distortion isn't too bad. I don't use it for Astro or stuff like that though.

-- hide signature --

Wedding Photographer Belfast
https://www.purephotoni.com

 Pure Photo NI's gear list:Pure Photo NI's gear list
Sony a9 Sony a7 III Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +10 more
OP SimonOL Senior Member • Posts: 1,867
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience
1

MedicineMan999 wrote:

Hey thanks Simon. You know it was until recent years that select few zooms could match wit with primes. The FE12-24G is certainly one of them I've read at FredMiranda by Fred himself. Honestly I don't have any primo GM primes (well just remembered the FE 24/1.4) but on my most recent month in Alaska I only took the Tam 17-28 and 28-75. I operate under the 'close enough/good enough' approach to life and I understand many do not (the supreme pixel peeper). Each their own. I'll take a compromise in IQ that few would ever notice and less pack weight any day.

In the world of vintage lenses which I inhabit most of the time, the majority of zoom lenses just aren't good enough in my experience. There are exceptions; the humble (and relatively small) Minolta MD 35-70 f3.5 rarely fails to impress, enough so that I feel it may not be worth upgrading to the Tamron 28-75, at least for now. Auto focus alone is not enough of a draw for me 

I've tried a few vintage ultra wide primes and found them mostly disappointing, although they have tended to be from the cheaper end of the market. Whilst I enjoy using primes most of the time, I've found them to be very limiting at the wider end (a bit niche if you know what I mean!?) so I'm looking forward to using a wide lens that offers a bit more versatility and convenience. Not really expecting IQ to rival the best primes. My widest lens is currently 24mm so I'm hoping the Tamron 17-28 will add something new and different to the mix.

 SimonOL's gear list:SimonOL's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a7R II +1 more
voronspb Senior Member • Posts: 1,541
Re: Tamron 17-28mm user experience

For zoom lens, Tamron 17-28 is very capable. At 28 mm it's sharper than my FE28/2 right from F/2.8. And at wide angle it's even sharper.

-- hide signature --

Vladimir Gorbunov

 voronspb's gear list:voronspb's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony a7 III Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD +4 more
OP SimonOL Senior Member • Posts: 1,867
It's arrived :-)
3

The lens arrived this morning, just before Lightroom was automatically updated with the lens profile

My A7Rii has older firmware (3.3) and doesn't apply corrections in camera. According to some articles, the latest firmware should solve that issue.

Initial 'test' shots suggest all is well. It's certainly very sharp, at least in the centre, and compares favourably with my wider primes even at the edges. Distortion is quite pronounced but that was expected.

I'll enjoy exploring the capabilities of the lens over the coming days/weeks/months. I'll need some time to practice wide angle photography which is well outside of my comfort zone. At least now I have a lens that I feel worthy of spending the time to master!

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread

 SimonOL's gear list:SimonOL's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a7R II +1 more
Karl Scharf
Karl Scharf Veteran Member • Posts: 4,108
Re: It's arrived :-)
2

I just bought this lens, the Tamron 17-28 f2.8, to augment my Tamron 28-300 f3.5-6.3 A-mount lens.

This ultra light, 2 lens combination is the ideal travel photography arrangement.

The Tamron 28-300 lens provides surprisingly good images with my Sony a7iii and the LA-EA3 adapter.

Being able to seamlessly cover a focal range of 17mm to 300mm with 2 lenses with a total weight of a little over 2 pounds on a full frame mirrorless camera is simply amazing!

And all that, without breaking the bank....

Hope you enjoy your new Tamron 17-28 lens as much as I do.

-- hide signature --

...."Sony, your crap is so good"....love this quote!

 Karl Scharf's gear list:Karl Scharf's gear list
Sony a7 III Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG HSM Tamron 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD Samyang 12mm F2.8 Fisheye Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD +15 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads