Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical A-mount lens reviews
 czechmate#8273 date: Nov-19-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | A200 kit lens |
| price paid: | 500USD (new) |
| positive: | fixed F2.8 sharpness fast AF built quality price |
| negative: | 67mm filters (if you mind) APS-C only |
| comment: | I bought this beauty as a kit lens replacement, which what she's perfect for. I could use a bit longer range, but the fixed aperture won. Minimum focusing distance is reasonable, autofocus fast. Bokeh is beautiful. I was really pleased with the build quality, it's plastic but very sturdy and I love the focus ring and zoom. I really struggled with the kit lens. This lens made me love photography. I even shot my first wedding with her. Verz good price/performance ratio. A must have lens for me. |
; 12MP| snajper#8266 date: Nov-18-2010 | |
|---|---|
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 50f1.4 Minolta 35-105old |
| price paid: | USD340(new) |
| positive: | Sharp even wide open Not expensive Descent build quite wide |
| negative: | Range and not much else. |
| comment: | This is an excellent lens that will not cost you a fortune. It is perfect indoors in confined space which is what I bought it for. Very sharp and colours are Tamron typical which are quite good. Range is a big minus and therefore not very useful as walkaround lens which is not a big problem for me since I own macrohacked Min35-105old which is more suitable outdoors. Focus is spot on and it doesn't hunt. |
| vincentsiew#8060 date: Oct-8-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SONY DT 1870 SONY 28F2.8 SONY DT 55200 MINOLTA 100mm F2.8 TOKINA 80-400 |
| price paid: | 450 SGD (Used) |
| positive: | Generally very sharp lens. Value for money. Good grip. |
| negative: | Slightly soft edges at F2.8 Plasticky feel. Color reproduction could be improved. |
| comment: | Overall, a good travel lens. Bright even for dimly lit places but in auto mode, tends to hunt a bit but definitely faster than my other lenses except for the SONY 28mm F2.8. |
| DarkScribe#8041 date: Oct-5-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 17-35 F3.5, Sigma 17-35 F2.8, Sigma 18-50 F2.8 |
| price paid: | au$145.00 |
| positive: | This is a reasonable lens if you get a good one. I have unfortunately managed to give mine a slight knock and it now has the notorious back focus problem, little that can be done to fix it at a cost that makes it worthwhile. |
| negative: | Prone to damage (focus) from quite slight knocks, only suitable for APS-C sensors, not full frame, sometimes slow to focus. |
| comment: | It was a cheap lens and for a while it put in some reasonable results - it does need to be stopped down though for anything approaching good sharpness. Soft in the corners at any aperture. Usual flare problems and a bit bland on colour. I am selling mine at the moment and when it sells I will go back to a Sigma 18-50. |
| dca1213#8033 date: Sep-30-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70 Tokina 20-35 Vivitar 19-35 |
| price paid: | $400 USD (new) |
| positive: | Sharp Nice Build Constant f2.8 Lovely Color and Contrast Great MFD |
| negative: | None come to mind |
| comment: | A great replacement for the kit lens, sharp when stopped down to f4, superb between f5.6 and f11. Not cheap but not a bank breaker either. Highly recommended for a general walk around lens. Price paid is after rebate. Get a good multi coated UV filter, the front element is really out there and exposed. This lens performance exceeds all of those listed as compared to, the Tokina is the closest but still no competion. |
| Stevedb#7849 date: Aug-24-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | $450 New |
| positive: | Sharpness Focal length range Cost |
| negative: | Only for APSC |
| comment: | I upgraded from the 18-70 Kit lens to this. For me this lens offers a perfect range for most of my walk around shooting. I have been impressed all round. Finally it is available for relatively little $ while still ``feeling`` like a quality product. |
| ad_infinitum_oo#7756 date: Jul-29-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 24-135/3.5-5.6 Minolta 35-105/3.5-4.5 I Minolta 70-210/3.5-4.5 Minolta 50/1.7 Minolta 50/2.8 Macro Sony 18-70 kit |
| price paid: | 300 USD (like new) |
| positive: | Sharp Sharp Sharp Fast & accurate focusing Max. 2.8 aperture throughout Light and slim Damped zooming Zoom lock (not necessary but a plus) ADI compatibility |
| negative: | Distortion at 17mm Build Hood |
| comment: | I just got it this morning and have only fired off ~30shots, so this review might be subject to change in the future. I purchased this lens because I wanted to go wide and a new walk-around lens to replace my Tamron 24-135mm that I sold. Also, the constant 2.8 throughout the entire zoom range is really nice to have especially for indoor/low light shooting. Although the focal range is limited, I shoot mostly at the wide end, so if I needed to go long I always have my trusty 70-210. I don't mind missing the 50-70 gap; that's what our feet are for. First impression, being accustomed to the 24-135, is the slimmer build which I found more comfortable for my small hands. It's not intimidatingly big (67mm filter diameter) which will put your portrait subjects at ease. It's a lot lighter and not as solidly built, where the 24-135 was heavy with its metal barrels. The petal hood is flimsy, and I feel it's going to crack whenever I remove it. Now to performance; I can't add anything that's already been said about this lens. It's razor sharp stopped down f4-4.5 and gets sharper from there. That seems to be the case throughout the entire zoom range; although it's sharper above 17mm. At f2.8 it's fairly sharp at the center, but softens towards the corners. There's mild distortion at the wide end, but I actually like the effect and it's nothing serious and can be fixed in PP. The focus is fast and accurate on my A200 (thanks to the 2.8 max aperture). I've read complaints about some copies with focusing problems (noisy or front/back focusing). I guess that's common with 3rd party lenses not all made the same, so it'd be wise to test one out before getting one. Luckily I got a great, used copy online. Color reproduction is accurate but could use more contrast, but I shoot RAW anyway. This is a HUGE upgrade from the kit lens and a smart/cheap alternative to the CZ 16-80 (not as fast) or 24-70 (not as wide). |
| steunix#7670 date: Jul-9-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 24-70 f2.8 |
| price paid: | 360€ new |
| positive: | Sharp Light Very good MFD |
| negative: | A bit soft at corners when wide |
| comment: | It turns to be a very good lens, one that often sticks into the camera; comfortable range, reasonably compact, fast, good IQ, sharp. Havent't run in any flare or particular CA so far. A bit soft at corners when used wide, colors could be better and are a bit desaturated (common for all non Minolta/Sony lens on Minolta/Sony cameras, honestly). All in all, definitely a thumb-up. |
| OursoulsDad#7631 date: Jun-27-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-70 kit lens |
| price paid: | £335 new |
| positive: | Sharp Colours ok relatively fast f2.8 |
| negative: | none yet |
| comment: | July 2011 update. Just took a lot of indoor flash shots at f2.8 17mm and found the left hand 20% or so was out of focus. Had it exactly 1 year and don't take that many photographs (an occasional weekend shooter) so really miffed about this. I'll let you know how the warranty claim goes. I read lens reviews on this site and the link sites provided. I also tested a couple of Minolta lens that had different top end ranges and was suprised at how much better the shorter range lens was when magnified to match the longer lens view. All this gave me confidence that this was the right lens to choose and that I would not miss the 50-70 bit, plus I have the 55-200 if I did miss it. Just bought the lens this Friday and took about 150 shots at my grandson's baptism. Without pixel peeping, all I can say is that it was a good choice. The lens worked in lower light conditions (hotel and church), gave much sharper pictures than the kits lens (what lens wouldn't), and delivered many more acceptable pictures than I would otherwise have achieved. I might have given 5 on some scores,and probably should given the price of this lens, but having seen the stuff produced by cameras and lenses costing much, much more, I think I will reserve the 5's for them. |
| Amaceira#7568 date: Jun-14-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - Sony - AF DT 18-70mm F3.5-5.6 (A350 Kit lens) - Minolta 50mm F1.7 |
| price paid: | 400 USD used @ Brazil |
| positive: | - Sharp (mainly if you stop it down a little) - Fast focus - Beautiful bokeh (mainly wide open) - Good (natural/neutral) colors - Good build and feels great compared to 18-70mm kit lens! |
| negative: | - Not full frame - Slightly soft corners at 17mm when wide open - Sometimes it has a bit of backfocus! (nothing serious) |
| comment: | This one lives on my A350! Truly a walk around... to the point that I'm feeling bad about not using my Minolta (50mm F1.7) prime lens... even knowing that the Tamron isn't as sharp as the Minolta 50mm/F1.7 stopped at F2.8 A great indoor lens for events and general purpose. Great value!!! |
| crimemastergogo#7517 date: Jun-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
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 18-70 Minolta 70-210 |
| price paid: | 620 SGD |
| positive: | Sharp Bokeh Fast Beautiful Colors |
| negative: | Zoom ring seems a bit tight and slightly heavy but I'm being really picky. Wish it was a 17-70. |
| comment: | I love this new addition to my lens family. I got this as my new walkaround lens after researching and choosing it over the Sony 16-105 and the CZ 16-80, and I'm glad I did. It's wonder fully sharp, love the colours and pleasant bokeh. Not that bad F2.8 as well. Don't think I will be taking it off my camera anytime soon. It is a bit heavy and falls short on the tele end but hey you can't have it all. Value for money all the way. |
| tobyimages#7422 date: May-9-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 3 build: 3 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 3.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | Ł250 (new) |
| positive: | Sharp |
| negative: | Colour Contrast |
| comment: | Although this lens is sharp even in the centre wide open. I found the colour and the contrast to be lacking resulting in quite muddy looking images that dont pop like the minolta and sony zooms. Although it could have been my copy (now sold). Not overly impressed but then I usually use prime lenses. Distortion and CA handling was about average, light fall off was a non issue for me wide open. |
| PieterB#7381 date: May-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-250 16-80CZ |
| price paid: | 250€ second hand |
| positive: | Really sharp. Nice build. Fast AF |
| negative: | small reach, that's about it. |
| comment: | I bought this lens second hand for 250€. It is a really nice lens. The AF is quite fast, the pictures are razor sharp in the center from F2,8 and the entire frame is razor sharp from F4. It has a really very fast AF. |
| braynumb#7296 date: Apr-16-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 Sony DT 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 Sony DT 16-105mm f3.5-5.6 |
| price paid: | RM1564 |
| positive: | Fixed Aperture! Colors are yummy Price! |
| negative: | Build quality could be better |
| comment: | Just bought this lens two weeks ago, and I'm loving every second I spend with it! Last year, I chose the Sony DT 16-105mm over this lens. Sold that. And now FINALLY bought this. It's one of my dream lens! Though this lens is no Carl Zeiss, But the images I get from it just pops every time I take a picture with it! And also for the fact that it's dead cheap! It's worth every cent I paid for it and it's the best lens for me to pair with my Sony DT 55-200mm. Though the images from this lens is amazing for it's price, the build is a worry for me. Out of the box the lens's front end felt shaky. But it's not that much of a big deal for me. I still love it! |
| bcostel#7287 date: Apr-14-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 28-70 2.8 Tokina 28-80 2.8 |
| price paid: | ~350E(new) |
| positive: | Sharp. 2.8 Fast AF |
| negative: | wide open - sometimes CA |
| comment: | It's a must have on APS-C. Is sharp than Sigma 28-70 2.8 and Tokina 28-80 2.8. I always take it with me when traveling. When using wide open (especially inside) purple fringing may appear. Overall is a great lens. |
| pcarmalt#7235 date: Apr-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70 Kit lens Tamron 28-75 F2.8 (on full frame) Minolta 50 F1.7 Sony 100 F2.8 Macro |
| price paid: | GBP 270 ish |
| positive: | + Sharp (so much better than kit lens) + Great contrast + Great MFD |
| negative: | - Colours lack the special something that Minolta/Sony/CZ have - 67mm unusual filter size |
| comment: | This was a great kit lens replacement on A200. Especially as high ISO was poor on the A200, I used the wide apertures a lot. Colours have a good 'pop' though seem to lack a special something that the Minolta 50/1.7 and Sony 100 Macro have. Skin tones, grass etc just doesn't look quite as natural. |
| dee#7204 date: Mar-31-2010 | |
|---|---|
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 - AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 Sony - AF 50 F1.4 Sony - AF DT 55-200 F4-5.6 Minolta - AF 28-105 xi F3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 330 GBP (New) |
| positive: | Much sharper than the kit lens Quick autofocus |
| negative: | Needs 67mm filters Not full frame 50mm not long enough A bit pricey |
| comment: | A great upgrade from the 18-70 kit lens and miles sharper than the 28-105 xi which has been my main walkabout lens for the A700. Main negative point is the relative short top end range of 50mm otherwise no real complaints and this is certainly recommended as an upgrade from the kit lens. Unfortunately it has got me wanting the sony 28-75 2.8 for that little bit of extra reach |
| spada#7119 date: Mar-18-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 30/1.4 Sony 50/1.8 Sigma 24/1.8 Minolta 20/2.8 Minolta 50/1.7 |
| price paid: | $360 |
| positive: | Sharp! great contrast great colors fast autofocus |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | This lens surprises me every time that I test it up against primes. Even though the primes that I compare it to are stopped down, the Tamron almost always wins. It wins mainly because of the great contrast it produces. I always seem to like the colors better from the 17-50 also. It hits the focus perfectly every time, at 17mm, 50mm, or anywhere in between. I give the build a 3 because the focus ring just feels chintzy. The zoom is nice and stiff(not too stiff), and has a very constant zoom action, unlike some Sigma zooms I have owned before. Flare seems to make it's way into my pictures on sunny days. The only thing f/2.8 primes are better at is distortion control. |
| Pygmy#7112 date: Mar-17-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 35-105 Sigma 50 macro |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Extremely sharp Nice contrasts and colours Good build |
| negative: | Bokeh Sometimes CA Distortion |
| comment: | This lens is so great value for money. I expected a cheap plastic build because of reviews here, but was positively surprised as the build feels strong and it's quite heavy. As everyone says, it's so sharp even wide open at all lengths. My copy bests at 50mm as it tends to back-focus at 17mm, but that doesn't really bother me as I use it for landscapes mostly. It does show quite some CA at times, and distortion is quite pronounced at 17mm, but I guess most wideangles have that. Unfortunately bokeh is really not that great. The colours are nice but a bit warm to my taste, so I turn down colour-temperature and get pleasing results. Fantastic combination of a lens great for landscapes, low-light and portrait! Update: it's awesome on the a77, and no more backfocus at wideangle (it was my a700)! |
| Eric_D#7106 date: Mar-16-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-70 Sony 75-300 Sony |
| price paid: | 399USD (New) |
| positive: | Sharp even wide open Zoom lock 7 year warranty Great value |
| negative: | Plastic (but it works great and its cheap) |
| comment: | This lens is SOOOO MUCH BETTER than the 18-70. You will be giving up some reach and magnification. But if you can scrape together the money you will gain so much in sharpness, speed and DOF control. The only real down side I have seen is internal flare from street lights when shooting at night. I could not give it a 5 on sharpness only because it is not at its best at 50mm f2.8, still very good, but better stopped down to f4.0. |
| chored#7085 date: Mar-14-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony Kit 18-70 Kit |
| price paid: | 300 GBP (new) |
| positive: | Sharp Fast |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | I bought this as a replacement for the kit lens which came with my A350 and it's now my main walkabout lens on my A700. It's sharp, even wide open and has great colours and bokeh. |
| LyleG#6992 date: Mar-4-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | cz16-80 sony 16-105 sigma 17-70 minolta 35-105 |
| price paid: | 400 Canadian |
| positive: | sharp as a tack, even wide open fast, constant 2.8 colors contrast build |
| negative: | distortion at the wide end |
| comment: | As I look at some of these reviews I cant help but shake my head. People complaining about build quality makes no sense to me. The lens is as well built as any I have used, and is better built that the sony 16-80cz and the 16-105 I had prior. This lens is extremely sharp, even wide open. Its easily as sharp as the zeiss 16-80. Colors and contrast are excellent as well, bokeh is very good too. The big advantage his lens has is speed. It is over 2 stops faster than the CZ at 50mm, and even more against the 16-105. Yes, its got a shorter focal range, but big deal. 3-5 steps and thats negated. You can compensate for focal length, but speed cant be made up. You either got it or you dont. My only gripe would be the wide angle distortion but this is common in all wide angle zooms and isnt really a fault of the tamron specifically. I do find it does have more distortion at 17mm that the sigma 17-70 had (quite a lot more) and the sony 18-55sam. It also has some bad flare in tough conditions. Still highly recommended |
| Apocalypse_later#6990 date: Mar-3-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 3 build: 3 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 3.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 70-300G Sony 50 1.4 Minolta 135 2.8 Beercan |
| price paid: | 290€ new |
| positive: | Sharp, CA... good even at 2.8 and great 5.6. Cheap. Light and small. CA very well controlled. AF works very well (in A700). |
| negative: | Weak build. Barrel distortion at 17mm. Vigneting even at f5.6 in low focals. 17mm extreme corners (really extreme, not the middle) not valid for landscapes at any aperture, You´ll must cut a bit. |
| comment: | Sharp, light, small, cheap... good quality. Weak build. It´snt a disaster, but could be better. Extreme corners 17mm not usable for landscapes, for its field curvature. |
| ThisIsIT#6955 date: Feb-23-2010 | |
|---|---|
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 16-80 f3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | USD 350 (used) |
| positive: | Wide angle Workable at f2.8 Rather sharp |
| negative: | Colours in low-light conditions even outdoors (I've not used filters with it) |
| comment: | Affordable wide angle lens with fixed maximum aperture. |
| Mayro#6944 date: Feb-21-2010 | |
|---|---|
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 Minolta24-105 Sigma 24-70 F2,8 macro Minolta 35-70 f4 Tamron 28-75 f2,8 Sony 18-70 Sony 18-55 Sam And so on. |
| price paid: | 4300 sek |
| positive: | For cost? Everything..It is so good so IT is little hard to understand it don't have higher prise. |
| negative: | It could have being 17-70 .. Then it would be close to perfect. But 17-50 work anyway.. |
| comment: | I wright so bad English. So I cant say so much in writing. But if you need a good good allround lense for a nice price I can only give my best recommendation for this Tamron 17-50 f2,8.. It will serve you and give you nice photos with good sharp (even in F2,8 !) and nice colors.. I really really like this lense... |
| S4m0302#6846 date: Jan-30-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL1870 |
| price paid: | 470 USD (new) |
| positive: | price sharp color |
| negative: | build quality short range |
| comment: | I love this lens. This is my walk around lens. I hope it could be longer zoom range. I think this is the best lens on APS-C to replace kit. |
| htarash#6812 date: Jan-23-2010 | |
|---|---|
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: | SAL18-70 SAL28-75 |
| price paid: | 640 AUD (new) |
| positive: | Built Quality IQ Color |
| negative: | Could have been a little longer |
| comment: | Got this lens to replace my kit lens and as everyone else mentioned, I was very surprise of how much a step up this lens was over the kit lens, love the IQ and it is sharp, very sharp. The built quality is fantastic, and I don't think I will ever really need the zoom lock as it never slides out when hanging, actually compare to all the previous lenses I have had, the zoom ring is that good quality that at the start I thought it is faulty, yes it is very rigid in a good way. At wide open, I get some distortion, but nothing that cannot be fixed in PP. I wish it was a little longer, but then again I knew what I was buying before I pay the money, so no major complain. Revised: it is almost around year I do not own this lens anymore, I still think it was a good performer, and I can see why I have a 28-75, I do like this range better on my camera. |
| snapper#6691 date: Jan-5-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 17-70 Tamron 55-200 Tamron 18-250 Sony 18-70 |
| price paid: | Ł298 UK new |
| positive: | Fast. Sharp. Nice colour. Fast enough AF (on A700) Non-rotating front element. |
| negative: | Wide angle distortion. Stops at 50mm. Lens hood (obstructs access to lens cap and filter) |
| comment: | What a lens! Blows the Sony 18-70 kit lens away for sharpness plus f2.8 all the way. I had already bought the excellent Sigma 17-70 as a kit replacement, and it became my standard lens when I upgraded my A200 kit to A700 body. But the Sigma is only f2.8 up to about 20mm, then fairly rapidly stops down. So when I heard about the Tamron 17-50, and found one on Amazon UK for under Ł300 delivered I went for it, and it became my first choice walk around for a while. I put the Sigma up for sale, but didn't get a buyer at what I felt a fair price so kept it. Now I'm glad I did as it gives me a great choice of walkabout lenses. The extra reach of the Sigma 17-70 makes it my first choice as a bright day outdoor lens, with the Tamron 17-50 my automatic choice for indoors and dull days outside. They are both going to be keepers for as long as I use A700 bodies. Ratings comment: Sharpness: is great, pretty good wide open, excellent at f4 to f11. Colour: I like the colour, seems pretty neutral to me, which I like (the Sigma 17-70 gives cool colours in comparison) Build: Feels OK, modern engineering plastics are not a problem for me. Zoom and focus rings have just the right amount of resistance. Distortion: Barrels wide open, but show me a 17mm upwards zoom that doesn't. Flare: I've not found problems with this. Lens hood gives problems, but that's not unique to this lens. Every lens I have is hard to get the lens cap back on or adjust a CPL filter with a bayonet cap in place. My answer quite often is to use an old style screw on folding rubber hood instead. |
| Basil#6552 date: Dec-8-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL 18-70 kit lens Minolta 24 2.8 Minolta 24-85 3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-70 f4 Minolta 50 1.7 Minolta 28-85 3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | My go-to landscape lens Tack sharp, even wide open (sharper than my 50 1.7) Fantastic color rendition Lightweight for all-day comfort Barrel lock prevents zoom creep |
| negative: | some distortion at wide end |
| comment: | This lens is incredible. It is sharp throughout the entire range. It made my A100 usable in low light and turns my A700 into a joy to use indoors. It is my primary landscape lens, replacing my 24 2.8 and 50 1.7 combination. it's simply sharper and more versatile. There is some distortion at the wide end, but that is easily correctable in PP. Combined with the Tamron 70-200 2.8, it makes for a pretty good budget-minded pair. (either my feet cover the missing 50-70 range, or I leave my walk-around Minolta 24-85 RS on for those shots.) |
| gilroymenezes#6549 date: Dec-8-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Konica Minolta 17-35 2.8-4 Minolta 24mm 2.8 |
| price paid: | 300.00 |
| positive: | Sharp at wide end. Nice color reproduction. |
| negative: | Soft at tele end. 67mm filter size. |
| comment: | When I originally got this lens I was very happy to use it. It was amazingly sharp on the wide end even at widest aperture. However at the tele end it seems a little soft wide open. So I couldn't really use it for portraiture. Thats why I gave it a 4.5 sharpness. The build quality is also not as sturdy as some of the minolta glass I have. To be honest I have never really put it to the test for flare, but I think it will hold well. I would definitely recommend this DT lens to folks who want very good pics out of the box. |
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