Is Tamron AFS DX17-50mm F2.8G GOOD??

[juan]

Dear all sifu, can give some advice, whether this lens good or not? for nikon mould:rolleyes:

[csjian]

Dear all sifu, can give some advice, whether this lens good or not? for nikon mould:rolleyes:

I will said is a value buy lens, Sharp & the AF noise acceptable (i think Canon mount more noises lah when AF)

on 17mm, some time will have barrel others work fine for me.

here my sample:
Tibet (http://www.shutterasia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4691)
Chiang Mai (http://www.shutterasia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3732)
Eelaine (http://www.shutterasia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3216)

if the noise is an issue, than u can consider Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8 but RM500 more but u get 1mm wider & also more solid build and the AF quite fast.

[jmaguireokm]

I will said is a value buy lens, Sharp & the AF noise acceptable (i think Canon mount more noises lah when AF)

on 17mm, some time will have barrel others work fine for me.

here my sample:

if the noise is an issue, than u can consider Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8 but RM500 more but u get 1mm wider & also more solid build and the AF quite fast.

agree with csjian, he own the Tammy 17-50 with his Nikon 70's, results is great with that value of $$$$$
like he mentioned, if you have the $$$$, can consider Tokina 16-50 :D
good luck :cool:

[Swift3230]

For nikon is best......thumbs up. for canon a bit noisy but can still consider to use it....just don shoot too macro objects. haha

[noruazumi]

people may confuse the term "noisy" as noise in the photo.
the "noisy" sound came from the AF machanism of the lens.

anyway, it is a value-lens that worth every cents. i've been using is most of the time. almost equivalent to Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 photo quality but at some point the quality a bit obvious. but then it is 1/3 of the Nikkor 17-55mm price.

a bit hunting in low light but not a big deal. Nikkor 80-200mm AF-D also a bit hunting in low light too. if i have extra money to burn, i would get the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8.

[csjian]

For nikon is best......thumbs up. for canon a bit noisy but can still consider to use it....just don shoot too macro objects. haha

This is not a macro lens lah..but the min focus distance = 0.27m (max. magnification ratio ~1:4.5) which much closer then Nikon non Macro lens.

here the Close up i took with this lens:
#1 i have cropped from original
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1243/872817663_6b4873662b_o.jpg
#2 Try out ST's Raynox!! cool my 17-50 bcome Macro :D
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1218/873671208_6a77e15f1e_o.jpg
here the review of the lens - Review (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1750_28_nikon/index.htm)

[edwintst]

I haven't got my Tamron 17-50mm yet.....but soon i think. :)

What about Sigma 18-50 F2.8 Macro (Market Price RM2K)???? Anyone tested this lens & compared to Tamron 17-50 F2.8 overall results??

[csjian]

I haven't got my Tamron 17-50mm yet.....but soon i think. :)

What about Sigma 18-50 F2.8 Macro (Market Price RM2K)???? Anyone tested this lens & compared to Tamron 17-50 F2.8 overall results??

this the new lens with HSM ..review from this month DCM said better than Tammy...nv try yet. (early 1 no HSM version sure not that good compare with Tammy)

another will b Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8

[ShaolinTiger]

Tamron is optically best out of the 3, Tokina had best build quality, Sigma (new HSM version) has fastest focus.

Depends what you want really :)

I find the Tokina overpriced though.

[StPatrick]

Recently I just bought a SIGMA 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5
Only had a few try outs with this lens and I would say I'm rather satisfied with it.
I do not know how sharp are my photos and hope to get some C & C from you all.
Maybe the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 will be sharper but I stayed with the above lens because of the focal length. (It may not be a much difference to some others)

[ShutterClicker]

Actually the tamron's is higher since it is a constant aperture 2.8 while the sigma's one is starting with f2.8 going down to 4.5

[StPatrick]

Actually the tamron's is higher since it is a constant aperture 2.8 while the sigma's one is starting with f2.8 going down to 4.5

There is also a Sigma 18-50mm, EX DC Marco constant f/2.8 but alittle more expensive than Tamron 17-50mm.
I havent got a chance to try any Tamron lens yet as still new to photography.
Maybe some bros/sis are kind enough to exchange or borrow me to test out..haha :) :D

[csjian]

There is also a Sigma 18-50mm, EX DC Marco constant f/2.8 but alittle more expensive than Tamron 17-50mm.
I havent got a chance to try any Tamron lens yet as still new to photography.
Maybe some bros/sis are kind enough to exchange or borrow me to test out..haha :) :D

Ha ha..u know who have the tammy cannon mount right? new 1 some more..:devil_smile:

[juan]

someone told me sigma (HSM)18-50mm F2.8 focus faster then Tamron 17-50mmF2.8, the price got different??

[ShaolinTiger]

someone told me sigma (HSM)18-50mm F2.8 focus faster then Tamron 17-50mmF2.8, the price got different??

Yeah new HSM would be faster and yes I think it's about RM600 more expensive.

[csjian]

Tammy - RM1500
Tokina - RM2000
Sigma - donno

[ShaolinTiger]

I'd say

Tamron RM1400-1500
Tokina RM2000-2200
Sigma RM1800-2000

From what I know.

[Mavik]

I am using the Tammy 17-50mm and my views about the lens is that at 17mm f/2.8, expect soft edges and sometimes a little bit of vignetting especially when you put on the hood. Sharp lens though but I haven't compared it against the Sigma yet.