Dont under estimate the tamron 17-50 2.8 non vc

Andy77

Andy77

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,543
Name
andy
Edit My Images
No
For anyone out there looking for a good walkabout/portrait lens do not dis-regard the tammy 17-50 2.8 non vc, here is a image i took earlier today just to show how sharp they are, only pp was a slight unshapen mask :D

5748128124_52e6c259f7_z.jpg


Andy
 
Lets just say mines going nowhere in the near future......:)

Andy
 
Love mine. Brilliant image quality and constant 2.8 at a bargain price.
Although I'm going to swap mine out for a Sigma 30mm for the better low light capabilities and compactness of it.
 
nice to know people are loving this lens as i should be getting one in the post any day now :)
 
I don't think anyone underestimates it. The lens has an excellent reputation and is more affordable than the Canon or Nikon alternatives.
 
lexie said:
what are the numbers for that shot andy? (focal length & aperture)

i'm really considering this lens from digital rev at the minute, the other consideration is the 30mm 1.4 sigma
Click to expand...

F8
1/200th
44mm

Andy
 
MartynK said:
I don't think anyone underestimates it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, any time I've seen the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lenses mentioned it's been said the non VC version is noticeably sharper than the VC version.
 
There seems to be a reasonable amount of consensus about this, so let's change the question. How many of you would choose the Tamron over the Canon or Nikon equivalent (I have no experience of any of the other alternatives) if cost didn't come into it?
 
MartynK said:
There seems to be a reasonable amount of consensus about this, so let's change the question. How many of you would choose the Tamron over the Canon or Nikon equivalent (I have no experience of any of the other alternatives) if cost didn't come into it?
Click to expand...

Ive had the canon 17-55 2.8 IS and i dont think the canon is worth the exta £££'s as the quality of the tammy is up there with it, build wise canon is better and it has IS, but thats about it.

So my vote goes to the tammy :)
 
MartynK said:
There seems to be a reasonable amount of consensus about this, so let's change the question. How many of you would choose the Tamron over the Canon or Nikon equivalent (I have no experience of any of the other alternatives) if cost didn't come into it?
Click to expand...

Without cost then the Canon definitely. Slightly better IQ, IS, better build quality, better focusing in low light, USM.
 
I love my 17-50 non VC even more so that I got a mint copy of Gumtree for 200 notes!
 
MartynK said:
How many of you would choose the Tamron over the Canon or Nikon equivalent (I have no experience of any of the other alternatives) if cost didn't come into it?
Click to expand...

The Tamron doesn't have USM so it's of no interest to me regardless of how much cheaper it is, if it wasn't for that I'd already own one but as it is I'm waiting on being able to afford the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. What I really want is the Canon 17-55mm but without IS so it's a bit cheaper but that doesn't exist.
The rings turning the "wrong" way on the Tamron would bother me too, though that's not a deal breaker.

If cost didn't come into it (assuming you mean they all had the same price) then not buying the Canon would surely be quite foolish unless the weight/size bothered you?
 
Last edited:
MartynK said:
There seems to be a reasonable amount of consensus about this, so let's change the question. How many of you would choose the Tamron over the Canon or Nikon equivalent (I have no experience of any of the other alternatives) if cost didn't come into it?
Click to expand...

If cost didn't come into it then the Canon is the better lens. Image quality might be on a part with the Tamron but for many people build and handling also need to be taken into consideration. The Tamron does fall behind the Canon in these areas.

Andy77 said:
F8
1/200th
44mm

Andy
Click to expand...

Although in fairness, most lenses will peform incredibly well when set to F8 and the output is resized for web :)
 
Phil789 said:
Good to know as after much research I ordered one and waiting for delivery now. Couldn't find a bad word said about this lens.

Also, for anyone looking to buy one, cheapest I found it at was £250 here:

http://www.procamerashop.co.uk/product/Tamron_SP_AF_17-50mm_F%7C2.8_XR_Di_II_LD_Aspherical_IF_(Canon_Mount)_34625

Seems a good deal as they are selling for around £220 2nd hand on eBay!
Click to expand...

Actually, I've seen them go for under £140 on eBay - you just need to be patient ;)
 
ive never seen one go for £140, somebody obviously need to get shot of the lens pretty quickly................Going rate seems to be around the £200 mark.

Andy
 
bit underimpressd with mine so far :shrug:

seems a tad soft & appears to underexpose a bit when stopped down :shake:

need to try a few more shots in better light to find out for sure :thinking:
 
I bought my copy from Aperture UK for £190 about a month ago- mint condition, but no box and no original lens cap.

Is it just me or do these lenses look a bit tatty anyway? I love the performance on mine but these Tamrons sort of look worn out without anything being wrong with it!

Also having watched ebay and other second hand shops for a while I have come to the conclusion that ebay isn't usually the place to find the best deals!
 
Actually I think it's the VC version that is under estimated. I like my VC btw.

I believe the non VC's sharpness and VFM is not in question.
 
i got one and i like it but the noisy auto focus and innacuracy of it all is poor imo.

you get what u pay for!
 
jonneymendoza said:
i got one and i like it but the noisy auto focus and innacuracy of it all is poor imo.

you get what u pay for!
Click to expand...

Sounds a little harsh from what i've read..... but as you own one, can't argue I suppose.

Is the AF only a problem on Nikon bodies without AF Motors? ie my D3100?

Or is the AF inaccurate and noisy full-stop?

I was hoping this would be my next step up lens...... now i'm not so sure. :thinking:
 
My mate has one and its really sharp even wide open, even more so stopped down. Yes its a bit noisey, but he can live with that, we find it quite quick to focus, being a f/2.8 lens the viewfinder is quite bright too. Mind you he is using a 7D with the 100% viewfinder .
 
Zarch said:
Sounds a little harsh from what i've read..... but as you own one, can't argue I suppose.

Is the AF only a problem on Nikon bodies without AF Motors? ie my D3100?

Or is the AF inaccurate and noisy full-stop?

I was hoping this would be my next step up lens...... now i'm not so sure. :thinking:
Click to expand...

im using it on a canon 400d. the auto focus is hit and miss sometimes and it is loud.

Still it is 10x better then my stock 17-55mm canon lens which i now use as a coaster.

im not trying to put anyone off with this lens, its a great lens for the price. i will upgrade to a L lens equivalent in the near future though.
 
jonneymendoza said:
i
im not trying to put anyone off with this lens, its a great lens for the price. i will upgrade to a L lens equivalent in the near future though.
Click to expand...

Understand that, thanks for your honesty. :thumbs:

If anyone is using the Tamron 2.8 17-50 on a non AF motor Nikon i'd love to hear your thoughts on it. (D5100, D5000, D3100, D3000, D60, D40, D40x etc)
 
Zarch said:
If anyone is using the Tamron 2.8 17-50 on a non AF motor Nikon i'd love to hear your thoughts on it. (D5100, D5000, D3100, D3000, D60, D40, D40x etc)
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. For at least a couple of years, all of them have been sold with the inbuilt motor - so it doesn't matter if you are using it on the lowest consumer DX body or the top end professional DX body, the AF will be determined by the Tamron lens motor, not by the body.

I bought one yesterday! :clap:
 
freecom2 said:
It doesn't matter. For at least a couple of years, all of them have been sold with the inbuilt motor - so it doesn't matter if you are using it on the lowest consumer DX body or the top end professional DX body, the AF will be determined by the Tamron lens motor, not by the body.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that..... I "thought" that the body would take over AF duties if it had the power to do so.

I'd have "thought" the AF motors on bodies would be better/faster than onboard the lens? (there's me thinking again!) :cuckoo:
 
Zarch said:
Thanks for that..... I "thought" that the body would take over AF duties if it had the power to do so.

I'd have "thought" the AF motors on bodies would be better/faster than onboard the lens? (there's me thinking again!) :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

I thought so too, but it's not the case. The situation would be that both the lens and the camera both have AF motors, and in that situation it's the motor in the lens that does the work. The camera AF motor, which works by 'screw-drive' - like this:
screwdrive-001.jpg
- obviously needs a hole on the lens side to accommodate the screw coming from the camera body, and any lens with it's own inbuilt motor won't have that. Normal "AF/AF-D" lenses are the ones that use the inbuilt screw motor.

As for that, it depends. The late film Nikon SLRs (and the early DSLRs on which they were based) are known to have absolutely brutal AF motors, built for absolute maximum AF performance. Nowadays, lens motors are pretty good - the one in my 35mm f/1.8 DX is extremely fast and silent, focusing from infinity to closest focusing distance is very snappy. The one in the 17-50 f/2.8 Tamron is a lot noisier (sounds like a photocopying machine) but still reasonably snappy. I haven't tried any normal AF/AF-D screw-drive lenses so I can't report back performance/noise from those.

(Hope you understood that, lots of random abbreviations!)
 
jonneymendoza said:
Does USM canon lenses have the AF motor on the lens or camera?
Click to expand...
All Canon EF/EF-S lenses have motors in the lens. None of the Canon DSLRs have motors in body.

USM is the better/quicker/quieter motor for the Canon systems.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Does USM canon lenses have the AF motor on the lens or camera?
Click to expand...

All canon mount auto focus lenses have in lens focus motors.

The EF mount has never used in body focus motors.
 
travellingcello said:
I never understood this thing with Nikon and motors in the body - why is that?
Click to expand...

Same here, I'd love to know. Just makes the choice of lenses harder if you've ended up with the 'wrong' body. :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top