 |
Digital camera reviews of Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD SP Aspherical (IF) Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR CamerasDigital camera Review: Excellent standard zoom Summary: 4 Stars
Very nice lens. Tack sharp wide open, light weight for a f/2,8, nice color and contrast. I considered this or the Canon 17-55IS. I picked this one because of the price, and I'm thrilled with it. The only downside is AF. It's noisy and slow compared to USM lenses from Canon, but the thing I miss the most is the FTM you get with USM/HSM lenses.
Handles well. The zoom ring is nice. However, the MF ring is not too good, but with the lack of FTM, I find myself not using it so much.
Construction quality is decent, but it's certainly not a Canon L or Sigma EX.
Apart from some minor downsides, it's a great lens capable of delivering amazing IQ. I don't give it a 5 star rating because of the AF.
Digital camera Review: Excellent standard zoom for a 1.6x sensor without breaking the bank Summary: 5 Stars
First off, I will say this is the lens I use most in my bag. The nice thing about it is that it usable in so many situations. The F2.8 constant aperture means it can be used in low light or when you want a shallower DOF. The 17mm means it can be used indoors or for landscapes. The Fast AF and F2.8 means it is good for taking pictures of your children. Any photographer should find a purpose for this lens.
So it's range a constant aperture are appealing, but that doesn't mean it can perform well at F2.8. Well luckily this lens does. Wide open, this lens is very sharp in the center, and is pretty sharp in the edges, even at wide angle. It does experience some focus plane curvature which can make edges seem softer. Vignetting is very minor, and the lens is fairly consistent throughout the range. And all this is wide open F2.8. Stop down to F4, F5.6, F8, and the great IQ becomes fantastic. So you don't have to worry about adjusting the aperture for image quality, only for DOF and light.
The primary competition of this lens is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS. Optically, it is very similar in sharpness. it has some focal lengths which are slightly stronger, some are slightly weaker, but the difference is pretty much negligible from the tests I've seen and comparing it to my Tamron. Here are the advantages of each:
Canon 17-55 F2.8:
USM Autofocus with Full Time Manual
Image Stabilization
Slightly longer in the tele end
Tamron 17-50 F2.8:
Half the price of the Canon
Smaller and lighter
Slightly wider 17mm
They are both excellent lenses. But the Tamron you rather have a smaller lighter cheaper lens, buy the Canon if you need IS and USM. Otherwise, they are so close in actually image quality and build quality, that you'd be equally happy with the quality of photos from either lens.
Digital camera Review: Excellent value - Very Good Lens Summary: 5 Stars
After shooting with the Tamron 17-50 2.8 for a while now I can say it's really quite good. The main thing I found myself wishing for was more length -- moreso than wishing I'd spent an extra $700 for IS. (And I definitely wanted 2.8 throughout the zoom range, eliminating other choices.) The reverse zoom direction (compared to Canon normal) was not hard to get used to at all. At first I thought the AF noise was a little loud, but I quickly got used to it and no one around me noticed it: no problem. Rotating focus ring: Sometimes I could feel it move under the edge of my finger tips but in practice my fingers fell behind the ring so again: no problem.
The inclusion of the hood was very nice. Something like $40 extra for a hood for the already ~$1k Canon 17-55 IS? Thanks, Canon: that helped drive my choice of the Tammie. Saved a ton of money and got a great lens.
Digital camera Review: Excellent value, sharp as a tack, but had to return the 1st copy Summary: 5 Stars
I had to return the first copy of this lens (not from Amazon) due to obvious softness in the top left of the image. I mean really bad, not just 'hmmm...not quite as sharp as the rest of the image'.
However, the second copy is stunning, incredibly sharp and contrasty, with minimal to no CA. When I returned the first one to the store, I almost went for the Canon version at twice the price, but decided to give the Tamron one more try based on my previous experience with their lenses, the latest being the excellent 28-75 f2.8. I'm glad I stayed with the Tamron, as this copy leaves nothing to be desired and about 500.00 in my pocket. I have IS on my longer lenses (Canon 70-200L is one), but don't need it at this focal length and lens weight. I highly recommend this lens (just be sure you get a good copy).
Digital camera Review: Excellent walk-around constant f/2.8 lens Summary: 4 Stars
This lens does not seem to get the credit it deserves. It is very sharp, especially at f/4 and smaller apertures. It peaks at around 35mm f/5.6 where it is extremely sharp edge to edge. Color rendition is excellent.
Autofocus is quick, partly because it is only 45 degrees from close focus to infinity [manual focus is difficult for that reason]. Like all lenses, autofocus does hunt in low light or when the focus point is on an area of low contrast, nothing new here. Auto-focus is a camera-and-lens task, so can't blame only the lens (I am using a Canon XTi 400D).
Build quality is excellent, but not quite L class. I am very happy with this lens. It is a keeper.
More Customer Reviews: First Review 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
|
 |