Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical A-mount lens reviews
 ratboy#9891 date: Feb-5-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 17-70 DC OS HSM |
| price paid: | 240 GBP (new) |
| positive: | Sharpness Fast speed Very useable images wide open |
| negative: | Minimum MFD/max magnification |
| comment: | Excellent sharpness across the frame but a tiny, tiny bit soft in the corners even when stopped down. However, this is the very extremes of the image. Well balanced lens for my A450 and reasonably fast focusing. On an SLT (A65) body it is significantly faster than HSM lenses. In comparison to the Sigma 17-70 DC OS HSM this is a sharper lens and produces usable images even wide open, which the Sigma does not. It does have slightly more distortion particularly at the wide end though. Build is not quite up to the Sigmas but not bad either. Also seems to have slightly more CA than the Sigma. Nice lens, I'm pleased with it so far. Update: I have noticed more flare recently, so demoting the flare rating. |
; 16MP| Rebecca#9850 date: Jan-25-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-55 kit lens Sony 35mm f1.8 Sony 50mm f1.4 |
| price paid: | $325 USD (new) |
| positive: | Fast -- handles light well Sharp Good color Decent af speed |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | I bought this with the Tamron 28-75, and, except for a macro, they complete my kit. I couldn't find any other way to get this kind of speed in a combined focal length of 17-75mm for this price. The price for the two of them together was outstanding. This lens makes sharp photos (although not nearly so sharp as either one of my primes) with good color. The Sony 18-55 also takes sharp photos, or at least, sharp enough for me. What separates the two is the way they handle light. The Tamron 17-50 with its f2.8 radically increases my options for where and what kind of photo I can take. The kit lens is ok, but the minute you get it indoors, it starts to fight you. As far as I'm concerned, hauling around a big honking flash and putting it on and off the camera is no less a hassle than changing lenses. Also, a flash causes people to turn stiff in front of a camera and I lose things I want to catch while I'm messing with it. One shot with a flash, and whatever I'm trying to photograph (unless, of course, it's a rock) stops what it's doing and starts either running away or posing. Add to that the simple fact that I like the color and the ... I dunno ... the texture of natural light. I just think it's prettier. All this makes this lens a no-brainer for me. |
| SonyA580#9843 date: Jan-24-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-55 sam |
| price paid: | £289.00 |
| positive: | Very sharp wide open Lightweight Fast AF |
| negative: | Noisey AF Plastic |
| comment: | Bang for buck, You cant go wrong to be ohnest, Constant 2.8 and sharp to match, 5.6 at the sweet spot. Lightweight plastic, so in the longrun time will tell if it stands up Overall a cheap pro lens ;-) |
| onsplekkie#9829 date: Jan-22-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50mm 1.7 sigma 10-20mm tamron 18-200mm |
| price paid: | 200 euro (used) |
| positive: | A sharp lens with great apetures. Lovely lens for in and outdoors. |
| negative: | expensive secondhand! |
| comment: | A great lens to improve my photografy skills. The lens needs 'fine-tuning' before delivering outstanding pictures. A great lens for grasping our family life! |
| PAF3PHOTOGRAPHY#9735 date: Dec-31-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-55,18-70 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | sharp,2.8 |
| negative: | not enough reach whish it was 17-70mm |
| comment: | missing |
| gqc#9698 date: Dec-18-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | minolta 28-75 f2.8. tamron 35-105 f2,8. |
| price paid: | 300.00 (new) |
| positive: | very sharp wide open. |
| negative: | not enough reach (for me) |
| comment: | For my opinion and my non scientific test this is the best lens for the money, if you like the focal length. |
| HiDesert#9668 date: Dec-6-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 16-105 Sony 18-200 Sony 18-55 |
| price paid: | 350 USD |
| positive: | Always sharp Pin sharp when stopped down a bit Good for closeups - short MFD Well built |
| negative: | Wouldn't mind more zoom range... Vignetting at max aperature |
| comment: | This is my walkaround lens. I've also used all three of the "compared to" lenses in that role, and the only one that comes close is the 16-105. I do occasionally miss the reach of the 16-105. But having said that, this 17-50 is the best walkaround lens I've used, by a considerable margin. It's well made - solid but not too heavy for something that's on the camera all the time. It's very sharp; at least as sharp as my Minolta 50mm F1.7 when I stop it down a bit. It's great for indoors shots; I can't wait to get back inside some European cathedrals with this baby. The large aperture will come in handy there, although it does vignette a bit at large apertures. I wouldn't trade this for a Zeiss 16-80, for... well, anything else. When you consider that you can routinely get them for less than $400 from various sources, and the competitor lenses (except the crappy 18-200 and the kit 18-55) are about $600 (used) or quite a bit more, this lens is a complete no-brainer. If it were stolen, I'd be shopping for another within the hour. I love this lens. Update; after many months of use, the zoom ring stopped doing it's job. You had to spin it many times to get anything to happen. I have no idea what caused it, but $155 to Tamron fixed it good as new. If I'd had the original receipt, the repair would have been free. I still love this lens; I was so happy to get it back. |
| boyzone#9552 date: Oct-31-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 16-80Z Minolta 35-105 |
| price paid: | 305 USD (Used) |
| positive: | -MFD -f2.8 -Cheap |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | Sharper than my 16-80Z in all range. Color is accuracy and natural. However, bokeh is just ok for me even though with f2.8 wide open. Highly recommend for in-door use. |
| gerbran#9545 date: Oct-29-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 2.8-4 17-35 KM Sigma 17-50 EX OS HSM |
| price paid: | forgotten |
| positive: | At 8 from 17 to 50 very sharp.Probebly not much sample variation. |
| negative: | Field curvature at 17 f2.8 |
| comment: | Photozone.de is quite right about the field curvature (=Bildfeldwölbung=beeldveldwelving (in dutch)) at 17. When the subject is far away, you can get sharp corners by setting the distance scale at about e.g. 3 meters. But then the center is not sharp any more (at full aperture). At 17 you have tu use f8 to get a picture that is completely sharp. A smaller aperture, 11 or so, is useless and not necessary. The KM 17-35 is a full-frame lens. That is why the corners and borders are better at 17 with full aperture. But that lens is softer and has less vivid colors and more reflections. The flare control of the Tamron 2.8 17-50 is better than the flare control of the KM (=Tamron) 2.8-4 17-35. Nevertheless both lenses are very good. In the shop I also had the Sigma 17-50 EX OS HSM on the camera and I had a look at the borders and corners. That {sample of that) Sigma lens was rather bad. Unsharp borders and corners at all díáphragmas. |
| zatik#9496 date: Oct-13-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | sharp right from f2.8 super sharp from f4 nice range price |
| negative: | little distorsion @ 17mm af could be better |
| comment: | I love this lens...it's a great lens for the price and I would recommend it to anyone |
| halrui#9236 date: Jul-16-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 18-200, Sony CZ 16-80, Sigma EX 17-50, Sony 18-70 |
| price paid: | 418 (new) |
| positive: | Compact, Build, Very Sharp, Fast accurate AF & aperture at all focal length, Good Price. |
| negative: | Noisy AF, Can be used only for crop bodies. |
| comment: | My kit lens which came with the A700 was the DT 18-200. It used to always be in the bag as i used to use my fast primes most of the time. I sold the slow DT 18-200 and wanted a good fast walk around lens. The choices were the Sony CZ 16-80 & this Tamron. Though the CZ has a super image resolution and sharpness the price of it is too high plus it not a very fast lens in low light and indoors. The Tamron is a keeper. Though it has a very noisy AF its AF is very accurate and fast. The images are razor sharp at throughout the stop range. This will stay as my standard walk around zoom. As for the build quality i have no issues with it and its better than the easy choice lenses and in par with the CZ 16-80 if not slightly better. Also the range is excellent since i have a 70-200 2.8 for my zoom.This is a must upgrade over the kit lenses for someone who wants quality optics at a reasonable price. Cant wait to have it on the A77 someday or whatever it will be called. :) |
| kankushok#9165 date: Jun-21-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70mm 70-400 G 400mm Tokina |
| price paid: | 450 USD (new) |
| positive: | Sharp Large Aperture Good build |
| negative: | Limited range on the long end Sometimes AF is iffy Susceptible to flare Vignetting at f2.8 |
| comment: | The lens is sharp, and well built. It's AF can be rather touchy at times. I've had the lens just rack from infinity and back at 50mm, until I reinserted the battery. This has never happened with any other lens, but could conceivably be a camera issue. I also see much more flare than with the kit lens, and the lens vignettes noticeably at 17mm f2.8. |
| trongkien#9099 date: Jun-6-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 16-105mm Sony 17-70mm (kit lens) |
| price paid: | 360 (used) |
| positive: | crazy sharp wide open f2.8 weight, it's heavy |
| negative: | distortion |
| comment: | This's a great lens for landscape and street photography. Color is ok to me. It's advantage is sharp. It's razor sharp. |
| socalson#9063 date: May-29-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70 (Kit Lens) Sony 18-55 (Kit Lens Minolta 70-210 (beercan) |
| price paid: | 500USD |
| positive: | Weight, Size, IQ, Price |
| negative: | not a silent focusing motor. |
| comment: | If you are upgrading from the lens that came with your camera this is hands down a winner. You will notice an immediate difference in the sharpness and overall image quality of your photos compared to the kit lenses. You will also notice the weight difference. This lens is heavier and you notice it. But the image quality is so great you will get used to it very quickly. The biggest difference you will notice between this lens and the kit lenses will be when you are indoors. being able to keep the lens wide open is a huge advantage over the kits. Great lens for family photos and traveling. |
| StefB.#9048 date: May-23-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | sony SAL1855 |
| price paid: | 200 euros |
| positive: | - constant aperture f2.8 - none rotating filter when focusing/zooming - sharp at center - MFD - fast and accurate AF even in low light condition - Nice color |
| negative: | - unusual filter diameter - could be sharper |
| comment: | I bought that lenses to replace the sony SAL1855 included in the SONY Alpha55 package. The SAL1855 is a pretty good lenses, maybe better that the Tamron 17-50, but I wanted a better aperture. Indoor, it is perfect. This is my favorite lense |
| esmall#8921 date: Apr-14-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony kit 18-70 Minolta 24-105 |
| price paid: | 315 |
| positive: | f2.8 wide angle sharp Great colors Bokeh |
| negative: | Not much to complain about |
| comment: | I've had this lens for a couple of months now and I like it a lot. Great all-purpose lens. Fast enough for indoor shooting. Of course it's not long but you already knew that. Stays on my camera 90% of the time. Good bokeh, sharpness and color. Another plus is that it can be had cheap used. |
| revs#8912 date: Apr-11-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL850 |
| price paid: | ~300 GBP new |
| positive: | Sharp Fast |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | I love this lens. The colours are superb, its extremely sharp and f2.8 the whole way from 17-55. Highly recommended. A bargain at the price! |
| Cav#8700 date: Feb-25-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24-105 Minolta 28-105 Tamron 28-75 |
| price paid: | 400 USD (new) |
| positive: | Sharp 2.8 Good price point |
| negative: | Could be longer? |
| comment: | I've had this lens for more than a year now. It was purchased new. My copy is sharp enough wide open and really shines stopped down to f4. I have noticed some dark corners at times but not too bad. Color isn't quite as nice as the Minolta 28-105 I used to have but it's still good. Build is about the same as the Tamron 28-75 and the Minolta 24-105, nothing to complain about. Now I just wish I had the 17-50 and the 28-75 in one package at 2.8 |
| Meddler#8670 date: Feb-18-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 350GBP |
| positive: | I think this is a great lens in terms of image quality and the price is not bad. The build quality seems quite good or so I though |
| negative: | The two I have owned both fell apart |
| comment: | This is my favourite lens and has seen a lot of action though the build quality might seem good, but I think it may well have a design flaw. The first one of these I owned broke down just 4 days before I was due to shoot a wedding with it. I had no choice other than to buy a new one because there was no chance of a repair or hiring another lens. I had considered replacing with the Zeiss but the Zeiss didn't seem to provide much better image quality. A year and a bit later my second copy failed in exactly the same way. A screw came loose inside the zoom and jammed the zoom mechanism. |
| sora3#8653 date: Feb-12-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM Sony DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 Sony DT CZ 16-80 F3.5-4.5 Sony DT 16-50 F2.8 SSM |
| price paid: | 800 AUD (bundle) |
| positive: | Good zoom reach Nice tonal range Sharp under decent light Lightweight compared to the SSM |
| negative: | Slightly cheap feel Noisy AF compared to SSM Needs at least f4 to be sharp Struggles under low lighting conditions Slightly muddy colours once under low lighting conditions Slightly confused AF |
| comment: | EDIT: Redoing this lens review as I now have a Sony branded lens that's similar to compare to. I bought this lens as a twin kit for the a200 and it has seen service on the a200, a33 and now, the a77. So far, this is what I have to say about this. The lens is quite lightweight in comparison to the DT 16-50mm f2.8 SSM lens. However, it doesn't convey the sense it is worth the f2.8 as the Sony (and indeed the CZ) felt like a tank compared to this lens. It is definitely a step up compared to the basic kit lens, don't get me wrong on that. However, I do feel it doesn't match the Sigma or the Sony SSM in terms of detail. On the a200 and a33, it is a good lens but the a77 definitely shows the weakness of this lens though. The AF is quick but it's not entirely perfect. It is noisy compared to the SSM and HSM. Sharpness, I originally had it at 4. But after taking it out more, I revised it to 3.5. It is sharp at f4 but at f2.8, it isn't quite sharp as I thought it was on the a77. However, the colours was something that the Tamron did well. But the Sony is catching up rather quickly with the SSM lens. The colours went quickly when the light went away. It struggled to get the details and a flash is highly necessary. Overall, I do think the Tamron is great for any camera less than the a55. But if you're moving towards the a77, definitely get the Sony DT 16-50mm f2.8 SSM lens. |
| countmoo#8580 date: Jan-27-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL 16-105mm SAL 18-70mm |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | F2.8 Range |
| negative: | Non-ssm |
| comment: | I like this lens very much compared to the other 2 alpha lenses. Quite sharp at F2.8 and very sharp stopping down. Good companion when travelling abroad |
| JeffB95#8573 date: Jan-26-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Old Sigma 28-70 I once had, unfair to compare to the 28-135! |
| price paid: | 330 GBP (New) |
| positive: | Range Speed Weight Results |
| negative: | Hood build quality, keep thinking it'll break one day when I'm reversing it! |
| comment: | This lens lives on my camera most of the time. I think it's great value for money, and feels great in use (except hood!) Some scenes need care when composing, but mostly it does the work I expect of it. It's still nice & tight after some 2 years use, so no worries about build (even the hood is still fine!) |
| Lcarus#8547 date: Jan-19-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 3 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Cz 24-70 50 1.4 Sig 12 24 |
| price paid: | 300 gbp |
| positive: | Inexpensive Sharp at centre even at 2.8 Light and balanced on a55 |
| negative: | Chromatic abb poor Focus ok, but not near ssm |
| comment: | Got this to travel with along with my a55. I normally use my 900 with cz24.70 so I wanted something cheaper in the same range(apsc equiv) to travel with on non 'mission critical' work. In all honesty it's not A bad bit of kit, it's no cz but if you want a fast lens to attach to a 55 you could do worse. As some reviews have said you do get distortion at the wide end, but any decent tog can fix that in the blink of an eye. The chroma distortion is a little more annoying, again, 5 mins and it's fixed in post but times that by 200 shots and it's time to think about pro glass. Summary Its by no means a perfect lens but if youre uploading to flickr, doing small prints or are happy to spend more time in post you could do far worse than this excellent value for money lens. |
| ponisch#8544 date: Jan-19-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70/3.5-5.6 |
| price paid: | 510 USD (new) |
| positive: | Not so heavy |
| negative: | Not no sharp until stopped down to approx. f/4, but that's nowmal for all primes. |
| comment: | This lens is extremly prone to flare, but the sun shade helps a bit most of the times, otherwise I just use my hand. The sharpness is acceptable at f/2.8, but not that good. From f/4 and beyond the whole image is sharp, even the corners. Distortion shows up between 17-18mm, but only in 'extreme' conditions i.e inside a house and mostly only in the corners. |
| wiel_sam#8512 date: Jan-12-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 2 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | 16-105 16-80 |
| price paid: | 300 USD (used) |
| positive: | - Sharp on wide open - F2,8 - Fast AF - Great Bokeh |
| negative: | - Bad on Colour |
| comment: | Used to own this lens. Was not pleased, the strongest side of this lens is it's price, especially if you buy it used. It makes it's price/quality ratio very good. But if you put the price away... I sold it and bought Sony 16-105 - larger price tag but alot more satisfactory quality. |
| ConfuciusTse#8422 date: Dec-20-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-55mm, Sony 50mm f1.8, Minolta 24mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Very useful zoom range and an excellent replacement for the kit lens. Constant f2.8 is very useful. |
| negative: | Corner vignetting, bokeh is a bit busy. Image quality drops off at the focal length extremes. |
| comment: | This lens is an excellent upgrade from the Sony 18-55mm kit lens and compares very well against the CZ 24-70mm (especially for the price). The wide end is useful. Focusing seems pretty accurate and fast although screw-driven. There is a bit of corner shading that is noticeable when shooting brick walls and the like. The bokeh is busier than I would like but fine for a zoom. The Minolta 24mm f2.8 has a better bokeh. The 17mm and 50mm extremes are somewhat distorted so having some kind of 50mm prime is useful if IQ is very important. This lens is great for intimate and small events (small group outings, family get togethers) where lighting ranges from moderate to full sunshine. Not so good for large landscapes or concerts. I like this lens for the convenience and value. I primarily prefer primes but don't mind switching to this lens when I may need flexibility of zooming. |
| gtoto#8416 date: Dec-18-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sony 18-55 |
| price paid: | 200 USD (used) |
| positive: | Great lens. F2.8 is great in low light conditions. Flare is not bad, does come with a hood. Way better than the kit lens. |
| negative: | Nothing that I can think of. |
| comment: | I was very skeptical of this lens. Really did not know if I can trust Tamron seeing that all my lenses prior to this were Minolta and Sony lenses. I was fortunate to get it at $200, in great condition. I think after a few shots, I really fell in Love with the lens. It was fast, quick and the 17mm lens is not bad at all. It works great with an Alpha 700 and not bad on an a230. It has become my daily walk around lens, very trustworthy. In my opinion, its very light weight and although the color does not really match up to the Minolta, its still non the less a really great built lens. yes it may be a plastic but don't let that fool you. I always try to recommend it to anyone looking for a great walk around lens. To this day, I have made some great photos with this lens. Too bad its not expandable to a full frame. If you get a chance, definitely try it out! |
| Snowcat#8334 date: Dec-2-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Olympus 12-60 CZ 16-80 Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 HSM |
| price paid: | 380USD used |
| positive: | Comfortable size Sharp at 25mm and above @4 and up Decent build It has 2.8 |
| negative: | Unacceptable quality at 17mm @2.8-4 (good only from 5.6) Crazy CA at 17mm Bokeh is quite ugly |
| comment: | Used to own this lens, I bought it after transferring from Olympus to Sony. Was not pleased, the strongest side of this lens is it's price, especially if you buy it used. It makes it's price/quality ratio very good. But if you put the price away... I sold it and bought Sigma 17-70 HSM - larger price tag but alot more satisfactory quality. |
| Rover#8308 date: Nov-26-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Kit lens Minolta 24-80 |
| price paid: | 120 Euro second hand |
| positive: | Fast AF Light F 2,8 Sharp wide open Color Cheap |
| negative: | Build |
| comment: | AF is fast and accurate. It seldom misses. Made great photos with this lens. Repaired sun cap holder. I saw a film on Youtube on how to do that. After a while the rubber zoom ring came loose. It became too wide. After some research on the internet I found out it was caused by sweat and warmth. It's not only a Tamron problem. I bought a new rubber ring (Camtech in the Netherlands) and fixed it within one minute. It's like new again. |
| Churst#8281 date: Nov-22-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 2 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70mm Minolta 28mm f2.8 Minolta 50mm f1.7 Minolta 50mm f1.4 |
| price paid: | 299 GBP (used) |
| positive: | - Constant f2.8 - Low cost |
| negative: | - Questionable build quality |
| comment: | I needed something fast and zoomable for my general day to day photography. This fits the bill perfectly. Massive improvement over the 18-70mm kit lens. Plus I actually like the colour reproduction through it. When the only new Sony options for fast wide-mid zooms are the Zeiss 24-70 and Sony 28-75 I think this does well to differentiate itself at a lower price point and with a more useful range on APS-C, with that aperture (and why pay more for an OS'd Sigma when you have to turn off Steady Shot?). The one downer is the build quality. When I first got it from ebay, I had to send it back to Tamron for a service (which was thankfully free) due to dust inside the lens and a loose front element. Recently, after a very minor knock the front element is loose again, which is causing a bit of AF instability as the element slide forwards a bit. (Update: Significantly faster and more accurate AF using the a580 over a300) |
rating summary
- total reviews: 214
- sharpness: 4.59
- color: 4.45
- build: 4.14
- distortion: 4.16
- flare control: 4.45
- overall: 4.36
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login