Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (Sony) or...?

eddiewood · 25-08-2009, 10:53 AM

Happened to have some cash, so I am tempted to get myself a new fast lens.

I use the Minolta 24-85mm f3.5-4.5, mostly between 24-50mm, it's a fantastic lens, but the constant f2.8 is making me lust after the Tamron.

I have a christening coming up, so thought that I'd try a fast zoom lens instead of my Sony 50mm f1.4.

I want:

- Constant f2.8

- Needs to be very good wide open at f2.8 between 24-50mm.

Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 can be had for £242 from OSD:

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Lens

Anybody got some test images of the Sony mount Tamron wide open at f2.8? No point spending money on something that can't be used at f2.8.

Any alternatives to the Tammy? Around £300 (new or second-hand).

Cheers guys and gals.

dazza74 · 25-08-2009, 11:03 AM

Nikon mount but I find it a little bit soft at F2.8 in my experience, it comes into it's own from F4 onwards but for the money I doubt you'd find anything better.

dazza74 · 25-08-2009, 11:08 AM

Some images I've taken a F2.8 with it you can have a look at :

eddiewood · 25-08-2009, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dazza74

Some images I've taken a F2.8 with it you can have a look at :

That's a lot better than I expected. Thanks.

Lewis201 · 25-08-2009, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddiewood

Any alternatives to the Tammy? Around £300 (new or second-hand).

This may tempt you...

eddiewood · 25-08-2009, 3:27 PM

I think that I would go wider than longer (oo'er madam). I can get the Tamron 17-50mm in the UK delivered at £300, hmmmm....

JSW · 25-08-2009, 3:31 PM

This shot of my daughter was with the Tamron 17-50 at 2.8

Its had pp to soften it tho lol its very sharp

eddiewood · 25-08-2009, 3:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSW

This shot of my daughter was with the Tamron 17-50 at 2.8

Its had pp to soften it tho lol its very sharp

That's a lovely shot. The urge to reach for my card is getting stronger

JSW · 25-08-2009, 3:54 PM

Just get it you won't be dissappointed

Don't throw money away by getting it here tho get it from One stop digital it will be with you in 5 days and its a stunning price from them.

eddiewood · 25-08-2009, 4:28 PM

Thank you all very much for your input and taking the time to upload the pictures.

I have done the deed and ordered it from OSD using Fed-Ex.

**Dave** · 25-08-2009, 4:37 PM

I'm going to go against the grain here.

I have one, I hardly use it.

At 50mm the minolta f1.7 thrashes it hands down for sharpness and colours.

At wider angles it's no where near as sharp as my minolta 24-105mm. I don't need f2.8 at angles as wide as those below what my minolta 24-105mm will go as it's mostly used for landscapes.

Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad lens at all. The f2.8 is nice as is the wide angle but I rarely find it the first choice to put on the camera so maybe your money would be better spent elsewhere. (Yes I realise it's a bit late now).

JSW · 25-08-2009, 6:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave

I'm going to go against the grain here.

I have one, I hardly use it.

At 50mm the minolta f1.7 thrashes it hands down for sharpness and colours.

Think you must have a bad copy, I sold my 50mm 1.7 after using the Tamron

At wider angles it's no where near as sharp as my minolta 24-105mm. I don't need f2.8 at angles as wide as those below what my minolta 24-105mm will go as it's mostly used for landscapes.
Again I sold my 24-105mm, very nice lens and very sharp but not needed after I got my Tamrons

Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad lens at all. The f2.8 is nice as is the wide angle but I rarely find it the first choice to put on the camera so maybe your money would be better spent elsewhere. (Yes I realise it's a bit late now).
I'd try another copy if you get the chance seems you were unlucky

denno75uk · 25-08-2009, 8:27 PM

Of course you will find people who don't get along with the Tamron, but do a search on it here and I reckon you'll find loads of recommendations for it. It has its weaknesses, but for the money I doubt you'll find a better lens. Where it counts, ie sharpness and image quality, it's a cracker in my experience.

Holowlegs · 25-08-2009, 8:32 PM

Hello there

I agree with what Deano has to say, am very happy with my copy.

Cheers Holo

**senu** · 25-08-2009, 8:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holowlegs

Hello there

I agree with what Deano has to say, am very happy with my copy.

Cheers Holo

One more here endorsement here, I also have and quite like mine despite it foilbles .. AF can hunt on occasion
.. and I did have the ridiculously sharp and ( costly) Canon version to compare it with.

To be sure very few Wide angle Zooms can match the 50mm (f 1.8) for sharpness but it is a prime and sharpness is what they are supposed to be good at
Could it be the Sony (KM) Mount is not identical?

eddiewood · 25-08-2009, 9:11 PM

I'll be back in a week or so and let you all know, I'll try some comparisons between the 17-50, 24-85 and 50.

I doubt I would lose much if I sold it on.

Pirate!! · 25-08-2009, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddiewood

Any alternatives to the Tammy? Around £300 (new or second-hand).

Cheers guys and gals.

Sigma 17-70mm DC Macro. Not constant f/2.8, but a great optic none-the-less. Unless you go Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro . . . then again, it's a prime portrait/macro.

Either way, it's likely you'll have to stop-down a shade anyway, so personally, I woudn't get too hung-up over constant f/2.8.

eddiewood · 26-08-2009, 8:57 AM

Showing as despatched. Getting giddy with excitement now

Fed-Ex tracking says Friday, three days would be pretty spectacular delivery.

eddiewood · 28-08-2009, 12:09 PM

Wow, it's here! That was FAST! Can't wait to go home

SevloW · 30-08-2009, 5:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pirate!!

Sigma 17-70mm DC Macro. Not constant f/2.8, but a great optic none-the-less. Unless you go Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro . . . then again, it's a prime portrait/macro.

Either way, it's likely you'll have to stop-down a shade anyway, so personally, I woudn't get too hung-up over constant f/2.8.

Agree 100% re Sigma 17-70, its a wonderful lens for the money, its the one lens I use the most. Not constant f2.8 but no big deal for me. It's very sharp, lightweight and focus is pretty fast.

eddiewood · 30-08-2009, 6:44 PM

I am not expecting tack sharp images and the few test shots I have managed to take indicate that it is actually pretty good at f2.8, which was the whole point of getting the lens

lordsmurf · 31-08-2009, 2:00 PM

Tamron glass at f/2.8 on modern high-resolution/high-MP cameras is not just soft, its unusable at print size. Even at f/4, some of them stink.

Stick to Tokina or Sigma, for a 3rd-party f/2.8 lens.

eddiewood · 31-08-2009, 2:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Tamron glass at f/2.8 on modern high-resolution/high-MP cameras is not just soft, its unusable at print size. Even at f/4, some of them stink.

Stick to Tokina or Sigma, for a 3rd-party f/2.8 lens.

erm, no it isn't.

http://www.avforums.com/forums/digit...l#post10221328

**senu** · 31-08-2009, 2:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Tamron glass at f/2.8 on modern high-resolution/high-MP cameras is not just soft, its unusable at print size. Even at f/4, some of them stink.

Stick to Tokina or Sigma, for a 3rd-party f/2.8 lens.

I have a Tokina , Sigma and a few Canon lenses , and they all do the Job along with the Tamron (which also sits on my 40D)

Im sure you have your reasons (?) but Im yet to find the Tamron " soft" TBH .. maybe my expectations are simple..

.. And I am not alone in that..or maybe my DSLRs arent quite Modern Hi res High MP..

I had the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 ( at twice the cost of the Tamron).. That really is a ridiculously sharp lens but it isnt twice as sharp as the Tamron

My Niece taken with it at f4.. handheld with shutter speed 1/60.. RAW conversion no PP Should be soft.. Is it?

JSW · 31-08-2009, 3:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Tamron glass at f/2.8 on modern high-resolution/high-MP cameras is not just soft, its unusable at print size. Even at f/4, some of them stink.

You need to take the lens cap off

Roosterbooster · 31-08-2009, 7:00 PM

I got the Tamron 17-50mm Canon mount from OSD a couple of months ago. I don't think you'll get anything better unless you pay three times as much. I'm very happy with mine.

IanW · 31-08-2009, 8:37 PM

Just a quick snap of my daughter at a friends party.

Tamron 17-50mm (Canon fit)
Shot details: 50mm, f2.8, 1/60

I love this lens.

Ian.

YorkieBen · 31-08-2009, 9:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Tamron glass at f/2.8 on modern high-resolution/high-MP cameras is not just soft, its unusable at print size. Even at f/4, some of them stink.

Stick to Tokina or Sigma, for a 3rd-party f/2.8 lens.

maybe you got a bad copy of your tamron? The 17-50mm is known as a good lens that is very usuable at f/2.8

eddiewood · 31-08-2009, 10:22 PM

I have just spent the last few hours going through *all* my lenses, I'll do a bit of cropping and post my non-scientific comparisons.

nikonuser11 · 01-09-2009, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddiewood

I have just spent the last few hours going through *all* my lenses, I'll do a bit of cropping and post my non-scientific comparisons.

great idea eddiewood, I am going back and forth whether tamron or sigma and would like to buy asap so that would be very helpfull along with your views