Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical A-mount lens reviews
 srohmen#6486 date: Nov-29-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 2 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 28-75 Tamron 18-250 |
| price paid: | 3500 nok (new) |
| positive: | Sharp Fast auto focus Great colours |
| negative: | Cheap build quality Loose plastic front, the one who holds the front glass. I had to glue it... To short range - what about a 17-60 f/2,8 :-) |
| comment: | Without the build quality problems, probably the best aps-c lens for a-mount. I miss the wide end on my 28-75, but the latter one feels it has way better build quality. |
; 10MP| lowcost4dslr#6264 date: Oct-23-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sigma 24 wide II f/2.8 minolta AF 50 f/1.7 KM 18-70 Minolta 28-105 f3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-105 f3.5-4.5 old Mir 1B (37mm f/2.8 M42 mount) |
| price paid: | 360€ |
| positive: | Sharp very fast AF on A700 constant f/2.8 compact good build perfect lens for indoor and landscapes |
| negative: | Neutral images not pleasing for portraiture if not computer retouched |
| comment: | I love this lens. It replaced successfuly the 3 first in the list I compared with. It is better than the Mir 1B and the sigma 24 f/2.8 which are good prime lenses. The minolta 50 1.7 is slightly sharper @2.8 on high contrast scene and has a better management of CA. I sold my 2 copy of minolta 50 f1.7 because the tamron image quality is good enough to avoid to carry many prime lenses. I do not consider it is a good lens for portraiture. For exemple the Minolta 35-105 old is a perfect portraiture lens |
| nvc789#6256 date: Oct-22-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | minolta 28-85mm minolta 28-135mm |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | sharp, sharp, sharp price build |
| negative: | images and colours not pleasing a little on the short end |
| comment: | This lens is very well priced for what it does. Images are sharp, stop down to f4 to f5.6 probably reaches it's maximum sharpness. The problem is this lens does not produce pleasing pictures, the colours and white balance are off with my a700 and I post process most of the time to get decent pictures. This lens is more clinically sharp and not really suitable for portraits but wonderful for everything else not involving people. The colours seems oversaturated compared to the minolta 28-135mm. I find that I do not use this lens very often. |
| Gary_W#6164 date: Oct-3-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70mm Minolta 24-85mm RS Sigma 24-60mm |
| price paid: | 370 USD (new) |
| positive: | Sharp Fast and Accurate Focus High image quality Good Color |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | This lens is attached to my camera most of the time. It seems sharp at any aperture or focal length. I reliably get high image quality. If I could recommend any improvements, I would ask for a slightly less flimsy sunshade and a sturdier filter mount. Sometimes I wish it went to 70mm. |
| Mr_Canuck#6162 date: Oct-2-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | CZ 16-80 Sigma 17-70 Sony 16-105 Minolta 35/2 Minolta 50/1.7 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Speed. Quite Sharp. Price. |
| negative: | Colours are average. Range is limited. |
| comment: | I used this lens for a couple of days and decided that I preferred primes for low-light and portrait work, and that for a walk-around range, the 17-50 wasn't my bag. I liked its image quality. It compares favourably to the CZ16-80 but isn't as nice in terms of colour and contrast. And it's not as sharp at wider apertures. But you do get that 2.8. Probably a bit better than the Sigma and Sony. Smoother bokeh in my experience. I'd say it's strength is it's 2.8 aperture if you want an indoors lens or a wider people/portrait lens and aren't into primes. But it's range is too limiting compared to the CZ with more on both ends, almost as fast aperture (and sharp at all apertures) with colour and contrast advantages. But you pay for it too. |
| JimmyMelbourne#6123 date: Sep-27-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Kit Lens |
| price paid: | 350AUS |
| positive: | Build Sharpness Colour Robustness |
| negative: | None so far |
| comment: | Have had this lens for a little while and really impressed with the low light capability versus the kit lens, feels nice and solid on the A300. |
| hassenpheffer#6094 date: Sep-20-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | -Zuiko 14-54 F2.8-3.5 -Minolta 24-85 F3.5-4.5 -Sony 16-105mm -Sigma 17-70mm |
| price paid: | 450 USD (new) |
| positive: | -very sharp -2.8 constant aperture -beautiful bokeh -close to a 24-70mm FF -close minimum focus distance |
| negative: | not as fluid of a zoom feel as I'd like, but this is minor |
| comment: | I really wanted an excellent quality fast aperture landscape lens and I don't think there is anything that would top this particular lens in this focal range. The optics are simply outstanding and the constant F2.8 enables me to still get great shots in low light. This was my main lens on a 9 night backpacking trip that gave me a mix of rugged ocean coastline and darker old growth forest. At ISO400 on my A700, I could still get excellent shots at F4 all day in the darker forest while my friend with the D300 and 18-200VR had to shoot at ISO800 and higher. This is a fantastic close range lens as well and on occassion I toss on my Tamron 1.4x TC to get near macro capability. I would say that this is the finest lens in it's class for Sony APS-C's. I had the Sony 16-105 for awhile as it came with my A700, but the Tammy is so much better in terms of it's ability to give excellent shots at fast apertures. |
| alpha300#6066 date: Sep-17-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-70 kit lens. |
| price paid: | 330.00 GBP |
| positive: | Sharp Sharp And more Sharp AF Good. Nice and lite |
| negative: | Shame its only 50mm |
| comment: | Had this for a while now,And for 90% of the time its superglued on ;-) Nice and wide at 17mm with little distortion. |
| Asmok#6058 date: Sep-15-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Kit lens Minolta 50/1.7 Tokina 35-70 |
| price paid: | 2000dkr. |
| positive: | Sharp Nice colours and contrast Ok AF Ok size MFD Exceptionally good for the Price |
| negative: | Build could have been a little better A bit distortion at 17-20mm My copy is a bit too tight in the zoomring and a bit too loose in the focusring |
| comment: | This lens is awesome for the price. It really is as sharp as people say and the AF is quite good. Build is typically Tamron, which is ok, but not like Sigma EX for example. But optically this lens is very nice! The MFD is also quite good for flowers and even big insects and close up portraits. I have not noticed any problems with flare, and distortion is kept on a low level. The focal length is perfect for APS-C, but 1mm more on the wide side, and 20-30mm more on the tele side, would of course have been nicer. If Tammy 17-50 could have the same focal length as the CZ 16-18, but keep f/2.8 and the cheap price, you would have the best allround zoomlens of all time! |
| razumovnet#6042 date: Sep-14-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28-85mm Macro |
| price paid: | Brand New |
| positive: | Good sharpness, pleasant bokeh & colors, solid build - hence good looking, 2.8 all the way down. |
| negative: | Price. Not long enough (80mm - perfect lens) |
| comment: | Lovely lens with lovely results. Never let me down (AF can be slow in low light only) Recommended. |
| tomiZG#6028 date: Sep-11-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | T 28-75 2.8 M 50 1.7 |
| price paid: | 250 EUR |
| positive: | excellent sharpness AF works perfectly min. focus distance value for money 17mm is nice |
| negative: | - / - |
| comment: | Got his lens from a Dyxum member. Fantastic mint condition. After using the T28-75 2.8 for more than 15.000 shots I wanted the same quality but the wider end, because 28mm gets you really nowhere shooting on APS-C. Must keep the 28-75 now for the 850 though ;-) Couldn't make up my mind between the Sigma 17-70 (nice range but not 2.8), Sony's 16-105 (what a range! but pricyyy and not 2.8 either) and this one, I am superglad I sticked to Tamron. The CZ is another league. The range is perfectly fine, after the first 3 weeks I realized that for my type of photography 50mm is long enough (portraits, indoors). But the 17mm are fantastic on the wide end. Distortion, of course there is, and the sharpness is not brilliant wide open in the corners at 17mm, but hey - it's really wide angle! Sharpness is fantastic stopped down even in the corners (I realized how useless a wide open aperture is with wide angle anyway). Love it! |
| emasal1#5888 date: Aug-21-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Kit 18-70,Minolta 50 1.7 |
| price paid: | 369 new |
| positive: | Small, nicely made,good price, very sharp wide open at F2.8 for a zoom lens |
| negative: | None yet. |
| comment: | This lens is truly sharp at all apertures and focal lengths with just a little edge softness wide open - quite an achievement for a zoom. The results look more like prime lenses have been used which is praise indeed for any lens of this type.Now I have a standard lens I can take anywhere with confidence - I just wish it was a little longer - 17-70mm 2.8 would be a real boon for me. Then of course it would be larger, heavier and probably not so sharp. |
| petesidewalk#5887 date: Aug-21-2009 | |
|---|---|
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 18-70 3.5-5.6 Tokina 20-35 3.5-4.5 K/M 24-105 3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 225 USD |
| positive: | very sharp light IQ price great range bokeh |
| negative: | none |
| comment: | Great lens, color is excellent, I like the light weight and the warp on the short end. Sharpest crop lens for the price.( even for another hundered bucks). I got mine used and think it is great. |
| pegelli#5885 date: Aug-21-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | kit, 28-70G, Sig 10-20 |
| price paid: | 198 Euro |
| positive: | Sharpness, color, constant 2.8 which can be used with confidence |
| negative: | Some distortion (easily corrected with PT Lens) |
| comment: | Had an extremely lucky find for this lens on sale and for that price couldn't resist it (NIB with full warranty). Picture quality is very good from wide open (right there with other G-glass), pleasing colors and fast response. Some distortion (as with any wide zoom) is evident but correcting it in PP is easy. Sharpness better at 2.8 than the Sig 10-20 at 5.6 in the range they overlap. |
| di2708#5884 date: Aug-21-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70 Sony 24-105 |
| price paid: | 349 Euro |
| positive: | Extremely sharp, high IQ, close focusing, fixed f/2.8 aperture, compact and light weight, build quality. |
| negative: | none really |
| comment: | I have been shooting with this lens for about 8 months now from news events, weddings and snapshots of the family. The image quality is amazing for the price and sharp at 2.8. |
| grade40#5882 date: Aug-21-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70 |
| price paid: | 360 |
| positive: | Inexpensive, lightweight, fast, sharp, excellent IQ, great build |
| negative: | I haven't found any |
| comment: | missing |
| zikzak3#5806 date: Aug-4-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 18-125 Tamron 28-75 |
| price paid: | 360 |
| positive: | missing |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | I really love this lens. It is not an G lens, but it is hard to tell from the pictures that I take. I carry it with me everywhere and it has always preforms perfectly. If you are looking for very sharp optics that rival the best lenses in its catagory try it out. For the price you can even buy a spare. |
| kraln#5768 date: Jul-27-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony Kit 18-70 Olympus ZD 14-45 |
| price paid: | 360 (Refurb'd) |
| positive: | Fast Aperture Sharp Wide Open Extremely Sharp stopped to f/4 |
| negative: | Focus ring rotates on AF Hood feels cheap |
| comment: | Faced with an unsatisfying copy of the kit lens, I sought a walkaround that wouldn't make me broke yet would yield great shots. After toying with my friend's 40d and his Tamron, I knew I needed to pick up a copy of my own. Compared to the kit: Autofocus is quick, results are sharp, construction is towards the better end of lenses in this price range. I feel like this lens out-resolves the 12mp sensor on my a700. Hardly any CA, flares are not an issue even without the included petal hood. I don't miss the extra tele from the sony kit, and neither will you. Compared to my old ZD kit: While a very versatile and well built lens, the image quality out of the Olympus was nowhere near what I'm getting with the Tamron/Alpha. I believe this is a 'must-have' lens for the alpha system. It's less expensive and faster than the CZ, and built quite a bit better than the 18-70 kit. For the price, you can't go wrong here. |
| statequieto#5742 date: Jul-21-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - Minolta 50 1.7 - KIT 18-70 - Minolta 17-35 - Sigma 28-70 2.8 - Tamron 70-200 2.8 |
| price paid: | 350€ |
| positive: | - Sharpness across the whole frame - Reasonably sharp at f2.8 - Good colours - Handles flare well - Good distortion control - Lightweigth |
| negative: | - Not great build quality. - Limited range for outdoors |
| comment: | I 've been usong this lens for two years. I bought this lens to replace the 17-35 and the sigma 28-70. I have used this for about 90% of my shots. I have found the color exceptional and it is razor sharp, (sharp enough for portraitures at 2.8)I do not use enhancement on 99% of the shots. I have only had problems with flare when nearly including the sun into the frame; CA is extremely well controlled too and you won't be finding much of it. Overall it is a versatile lens with great resolution even when taking photos of insects. You can crop down a great deal and retain the integrity of the shot. In fact, and for the price a very recomendable lens. I've had nothing but good experiences with this lens. |
| vitaly#5741 date: Jul-21-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sigma 70 f2.8 ex dg macro minolta 28-135 f4-4.5 minolta 35-105 f 3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 449 USD (new) |
| positive: | range sharpness build color |
| negative: | none |
| comment: | i like pictures made by this lens, enough wide for my needs,-buy it. |
| rnijholt#5730 date: Jul-19-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 70-200 Minolta 80-200 2.8 APO HS Sony 70-300G Tamron 11-18 |
| price paid: | 350 euro |
| positive: | Sharp, fast focus, light weight, price |
| negative: | build quality, hood, colors could be a bit warmer |
| comment: | I like this lens. It is on my A700 75% of the time. I wish it was 20mm or 30mm longer. |
| chuck1856#5729 date: Jul-19-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 28-85 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | range fast focus |
| negative: | sharpness away from center |
| comment: | I was looking for something approaching prime quality to use for indoor, available-light photos around the house. I like the wide end of this lens and the f/2.8, which is quiet bright but not so much so that the DOF is too shallow for snapshots. Perhaps b/c of the limited zoom range (vs 24-70) this focuses fast indoor, even on my slightly out-dated Sony A100. The feel, build quality, and weight seem appropriate for a mid-range lens such as this. I've been slightly disappointed with the sharpness away from center, especially at widest zoom and aperture. When set this way to capture the scene of people in a room, the people on the outside edges were so soft I thought the lens might have been dirty. But that's probably a worst case scenario for such a lens, and I'll even take that performance as opposed to giving up the wide angle range or f/2.8 in some settings. Better to have the ability to make a choice. Lastly I wish it had a little more reach on the long end for outdoors but obviously knew what I was was getting before I purchased it. I think this limits its ability as a total "walk-around" lens. |
| hallojenshans#5728 date: Jul-19-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 1 color: 1 build: 3 distortion: 2 flare control: 2 overall: 1.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | cz 16-80 |
| price paid: | 250 euro |
| positive: | missing |
| negative: | every pic was not sharp |
| comment: | sold it |
| hemus0971hh#5724 date: Jul-19-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ 16-80 Sigma 28-70 |
| price paid: | 299 euro new |
| positive: | everything |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | This is one of the best, most versatile lenses I've owned. I purchased it after reading so many positive reviews on this site. One of the best features is the large aperture of 2.8 that is constant.This lens takes extremely sharp pictures with vibrant colors.I use it more than any other lens.When looking for a lens in this range do not hesitate to get the Tamron. |
| iskra05#5718 date: Jul-17-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 370 |
| positive: | Can't beat the amazing quality for the money |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | I've been delighted with the performance of this lens.The picture is very sharp and very nice color rendition.The contrast is wonderful. It stays on my camera 90% of the time.I think this lens is the best deal among its opponents. Just my opinion. |
| hipercium#5706 date: Jul-16-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ 16-80 SONY 18-70 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Very nice color and amazingly sharp |
| negative: | NONE |
| comment: | I love this lens.I don't think I'll ever sell this little gem, unless I get a fullframe camera. In my opinion, this lens has set a new standard for price / performance. Highly recommended! |
| mgerasimov71#5694 date: Jul-13-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ 16-80 |
| price paid: | 369 new |
| positive: | SHARPNESS GREAT COLOURS,CHEAP |
| negative: | NONE |
| comment: | GREAT LENS.WELL DONE TAMRON! |
| shinka#5681 date: Jul-10-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG Macro Minolta 50mm f/1.4 Minolta 28mm f/2.0 Minolta 20mm f/2.8 |
| price paid: | 450 USD (new) |
| positive: | Great range Excellent sharpness Wonderful close-focus |
| negative: | None yet |
| comment: | It's an excellent range and I'm sort of kicking myself for not getting it sooner. I sold my Sigma 24-70 to pay for this and I have no regrets. The lost of 20mm on the long end is more than made up for by the 17mm wide angle (this is now my widest lens) as well as the much lighter weight and smaller size. I don't know if it focuses quite as fast as the Sigma did, but it's close. It's also very sharp wide-open. Long story short, I'm happy. [Update] Used it for a wedding and put several hundred shots through it. It was consistent and reliable. Great lens. |
| nhuynh#5649 date: Jul-5-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | MIN 24-105 MIN 50 F1.7 |
| price paid: | 280 NEW |
| positive: | SHARP,SHARP,SHARP |
| negative: | NONE |
| comment: | THIS LEN WON'T LET ME DOWN. WHEN I COMPARED THE SHARPNESS TO MIN 50 F1.7 AT F5.6, THERE ARE NO DIFERENCE BUT AT F2.8 , MIN 50 1.7 IS SHARPER THEN TAMRON 17-50. THIS LEN ALWAYS ON MY SONY A700, VERY GOOD FOR INDOOR AND PORTRAIT. |
| danichtfuer#5623 date: Jul-1-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | - Minolta AF 24 f2.8 - Minolta AF 28 f2.8 - Minolta AF 50 f1.7 |
| price paid: | 350 Euro |
| positive: | - sharpness - build, weight and size - bokeh - constant f2.8 |
| negative: | - only APS-C - odd filter size of 67mm |
| comment: | Compared to my f2.8 and faster primes in the 17-50mm range, the Tamron performs great. Stopped down to f4 it beats both my 24mm and 28mm in sharpness. Performance wide-open is great for this relatively low priced zoom. The best standard-zoom for APS-C, imo. Only draw-back: not very useful on full-frame cameras. |
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