Is the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 any good?

beercan

beercan

Suspended / Banned
Messages
582
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

Thinking of picking up a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II (IF) to compliment my new D7100.
Does anyone have experience of the lens that can vouch for it?

I'm after something shorter and faster than my Tamron 18-270 3.5-6.3...

Thanks!
 
Insanely good for the price for video, for photos the autofocus is annoyingly slow, noisy and it lacks IS, but to get something better you're spending at least double.

17mm isn't a lot wider than your 18-270 at all though, I'd get a tokina 11-16(f/2.8), amazing lens, nothing even comes close to being as good.
 
It is certainly way better than the 18 to 270mm, so you make a huge step forward there. I've only looked at test photos myself though, as I don't need a fast standard zoom, but I almost bought the Tamron in a bundle.
 
Last edited:
beercan said:
Hi all,

Thinking of picking up a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II (IF) to compliment my new D7100.
Does anyone have experience of the lens that can vouch for it?

I'm after something shorter and faster than my Tamron 18-270 3.5-6.3...

Thanks!
Click to expand...

Was my go to lens on my D90. Good value, sharp, light and great value compared to the alternatives!

Still use it occasionally. See my Flickr for examples.

S
 
I have one that lives on my D7000

Great for all manner of different photography although mine mainly does landscapes at the moment pending arrival of a wide angle lens

As a walkabout its hard to beat for the price
 
A bit Noisy yes, but I don't find the AF slow on mine. Acceptably sharp (usable) at f2.8 and very sharp at f4. Excellent value for money
 
I've done tests, slowest lens I've ever had, slower than the kit and the nifty 50 too, the noise is just another annoying thing.
 
I have recently bought one and am very happy with it for the short time I have had it.

You need to make sure that you get a good copy as these tend to have quality issues from what I was reading when I bought mine.
 
Am I right in saying that there are versions of this lens with and without their own focus motors? If that's the case, maybe that would explain the auto focus speed observations.
 
a great lens - I have the VC version. Wouldn't hesitate in recommending it
 
I had the non VC when I had a 20D and I think it was very possibly the best AF zoom lens I've ever used. It's quite compact and light and very sharp and suffered far less distortion than my previous Canon 17-85mm.

I didn't find the focus to be at all slow although it is noisey and you don't get full time manual focus.
 
woof woof said:
I had the non VC when I had a 20D and I think it was very possibly the best AF zoom lens I've ever used. It's quite compact and light and very sharp and suffered far less distortion than my previous Canon 17-85mm.

I didn't find the focus to be at all slow although it is noisey and you don't get full time manual focus.
Click to expand...

This, I use it on my 60D and its stunning lens especially for the price.

Very sharp at 2.8 and excellent at f/4.

Focus speed is not a problem at all for me, its fast, locks on well.

Only problems I have with it are that:

1. I'm used to full time manual to alter the focus... not happening with this lens.

2. not a fan of the loud motor either.

But does it matter? No , I use it for our weddings and its always attached to one body for walk arounds too.
 
I love mine on my d300 , even bought a 28-75 tamron for my d700 . I think they offer great value for money , have a look on pixalpeeper.com for some samples
 
I have one, it's a little cracker for the money :thumbs: I agree with not the fastest focus, and it is a little noisy but that doesn't bother me. The results are pleasing though, which is what i care more about!
 
Yes, it's a fantastic lens, apparently my hearing must need checking though as it isn't remotely noisy at focussing, mine was the fastest most accurate and quietest focussing lens I've ever owned, I have no doubts it's new owner will be delighted with it as well.
 
when i say noisy it's in comparison to my HSM Sigma or something, it's nothing in comparison to an old AF body and AF lens. My old 70-210 AF Nikon was much louder indeed!
 
Last edited:
Alan Clogwyn said:
Yes, it's a fantastic lens, apparently my hearing must need checking though as it isn't remotely noisy at focussing, mine was the fastest most accurate and quietest focussing lens I've ever owned, I have no doubts it's new owner will be delighted with it as well.
Click to expand...

Indeed I'm sure he will!

It's the focus acquisition noise I think people refer to...the last copy I had was a bit iffy for focus accuracy wide open indoors but I'd be open to that being a fault with me too :)
 
Cheap, plastick build quality, however that makes it light. Mine broke (electrical problems) after a week but it seemed acceptable IQ. I ended up going for a Canon 35mm f/2 to replace it and since going to Nikon got the 17-55 f/2.8 instead (which is signifcantly heavier and bigger but weatherproof).

After that and the horror stories I've heard from others about their Tamrons breaking I generally avoid them if possible. Think of them as the Acer of the photography world. Cheap and generally ok but prone to break moreso than others.
 
you must of been unlucky there, 5 year warranty says it all in my eyes.

And as above when I say loud motor I mean compared to the silent sigma hsm
 
I hired the "real deal" Canon lens and really loved it, couldn't afford the price tag so bought a secondhand tamron 17-50. And far, far preferred it. Build quality felt no different to the canon, it wasn't any louder than the canon and it gave me a sharper photo. The photo was a lot "cleaner" looking, too. Bokeh was ever so slightly smoother. I didn't use it wishing I could have afforded the Canon one - I used it glad that I couldn't afford the canon!
 
I have the non VC version for Nikon, it is pretty damn good :)
Really great range to have, plus 2.8 means good for low light.
Bokeh is not in prime quality but still can make you a decent portrait at 50mm.

Recommended... I will probs be flogging mine tho when the d610 comes out :D
 
The non VC version is probably the better buy. From my experience the VC does not kick in instantly and can ruin some photos.
 
Have had tje non vc version on pentax and the vc version on canon and nikon. Cant fault it. Very sharp lens. Normally shoot with vc off as it can take longer to settle than the autofocus takes to find focus, you need to be aware of this if using the vc, otherwise you will get a lot of soft images. Vc is handy to have though. Have now upgraded to oem pro glass in both canon and nikon format. Without pixel peeping can see no difference in image quality, Nikon has no vc and three times the price with less warranty. Shot for money for two years with the tamron, great for the money. Oem manufacturers will not recognise them and will not guarantee compatability with future bodies but thats really just marketing speak.
 
dalegt4 said:
you must of been unlucky there, 5 year warranty says it all in my eyes.

And as above when I say loud motor I mean compared to the silent sigma hsm
Click to expand...

Along with a few others I know.

The other problem I had is it just felt cheap. The plastic build was horrible. Fine on a £50 kit lens but a £200-300 lens?
 
Last edited:
strange, I don't think it looks stunningly expensive but by a long shot not cheap, the canon 50mm 1.8 looks cheap. haha :D
 
Thanks everyone for your comments and recommendations, I have just purchased the Tamron. Can't wait til it arrives on Friday! :thumbs:
 
Which Tamron did you get the vc one or non vc one?
 
toadstool said:
I hired the "real deal" Canon lens and really loved it, couldn't afford the price tag so bought a secondhand tamron 17-50. And far, far preferred it. Build quality felt no different to the canon, it wasn't any louder than the canon and it gave me a sharper photo. The photo was a lot "cleaner" looking, too. Bokeh was ever so slightly smoother. I didn't use it wishing I could have afforded the Canon one - I used it glad that I couldn't afford the canon!
Click to expand...

Really? The Canon 17-55 f/2.8 AF is near on silent!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top