Yapster
Senior Member
Sorry, didn't come in this thread today.
Yup, guess gerald bro answer your questions.
Choosing between Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 on D300.
- Thread starter desen99
- Start date
- Status
Sorry, didn't come in this thread today.
Yup, guess gerald bro answer your questions.
Several sites reported problems associated with Tamron 17-50 F2.8 lens when used for flash photography under TTL-BL mode, while none reported for TTL mode. It is linked to the errornous focal length information reported by Tamron lens during TTL-BL mode, resulting in over-exposure because of too much flash.
No reported cases for Nikon 17-55 F2.8 lens for flash photography.
Compilation of these mentioned links are at this website page
http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#more-245
No reported cases for Nikon 17-55 F2.8 lens for flash photography.
Compilation of these mentioned links are at this website page
http://dptnt.com/2007/10/over-exposed-flash-shots-with-tamron-af-17-50-f28-xr-di-ii/#more-245
dslrnewbee
New Member
17-55mm and a D300 is a perfect match. They were made for each other...
jnet6
Senior Member
17-55 is a perfect match for any DX camera.17-55mm and a D300 is a perfect match. They were made for each other...
ZerocoolAstra
Senior Member
Yeah but at the price difference compared with the Tamron, it's a hard-sell to an amateur photographer.
From what I've heard, the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 is the only 'pro-grade' DX lens ever made so far.
I've seen a number of wedding photogs use it, paired with D300.
I just don't think I can bring myself to spend that extra $$ to get it over the Tamron, build-quality difference and all.
Well, I'm speaking only from my point of view, since I don't have the camera with me ALL the time (i.e. I'm not always taking photos), and hence I can't justify that kind of cost.
From what I've heard, the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 is the only 'pro-grade' DX lens ever made so far.
I've seen a number of wedding photogs use it, paired with D300.
I just don't think I can bring myself to spend that extra $$ to get it over the Tamron, build-quality difference and all.
Well, I'm speaking only from my point of view, since I don't have the camera with me ALL the time (i.e. I'm not always taking photos), and hence I can't justify that kind of cost.
Depends on whether the amateur photographer is willing to buy it or not. I have no problem pairing my only DSLR, D40 with my 17-55, 105 Vr and 70-200.
if focusing speed IS an issue, you meant?
my 18-55 (d40x kit) lens can focus faster than the tamron. so i guess there's a reason to go for the nikkor if one has the dough. but it's really paying a lot more for slightly better. :dunno:
It's a good thing I guess, stimulate the economy withe the spending. I've seen a couple buying 5DII or D700/D300 as their first cam.
jnet6
Senior Member
wandering when is our turn...
are you referring to Tamron 17~50 to Nikon 17~55?
well, that depends, those who see only slightly better, they will go for Tamron 17~50
those who see lots of different, will go for Nikon 17~55.
srry lah...that post was written b4 i found my lens sharp. Then i realized after a bd's party, tamron is pretty good lens
i was comparing the 18-55f3.5 nikon lens which is the el cheapo lens which comes with d40, 40x. vs the tamron 17-50. the nikon is much faster in AF.
never tried the 17-55 nikkor but i bet it's at least as fast as the el cheapo lens :thumbsup:
i will upgrade to 17-55 should my shooting require. for now, tamron good enuff ;p
its sharp jjust not as fast in focusing
In term of AF speed, difference between nikon and tamron may just be a fraction of second. I dont feel that much difference. In some cases, even nikon lens takes longer AF. Is it due to having built-in motor in my tamron, thus faster AF?
dunno. u hear of the term "lemon"? maybe u got a watermelon instead :bsmilie:
best situation is u are perfectly satisfied with what u have. otherwise it's gonna be painful or expensive ;p
nah... nikon is WAY faster but doesnt affect me. just be happy its sharp and frankly i love tamron colors over sigma.. abit more blueish feel i guess
Leykid1634
New Member
Wow!! After reading this threat, me too being twill into buying 17-50 leow.
For many months saving up for a 17-55 (still saving), envy those who have one.
Really looks like Pro if got one leh...
thinking...maybe now 17-50 also not bad hor...thinking...
than can save the rest of the $$$ to buy other equipment...
Im not Pro anyway.... :bsmilie::bsmilie:
For many months saving up for a 17-55 (still saving), envy those who have one.
Really looks like Pro if got one leh...
thinking...maybe now 17-50 also not bad hor...thinking...
than can save the rest of the $$$ to buy other equipment...
Im not Pro anyway.... :bsmilie::bsmilie:
one thing to note, the 17-50mm focuses to 27cm, the nikkor, 36cm.
if u shoot closeups, this extra 9cm closer (albeit u lose 5mm focal length on the tamron) might be more important.
I found a way to get round the screwy AF with the tammy/d300 combi, for AF. use AFC instead of AF-S. i found that i miss far fewer shots this way. sure, u do get OOF shots cos the tamron is inferior in AF, but the camera is smart enuff to keep the subject in focus most of the time if u keep pressing half shutter.
use with 51 point AF for best effects :thumbsup:
my usual was to use AF-S. sometimes the AF will "hang" and i simply miss my shot. for now, seems like this problem is solved for the tamron.
in view of the closer min focus dist, i've decided to abandon the idea of getting the nikon 17-55. it used to be on my short list of stuff to get (or lust after). instead, i will get a 35mm F2 for now.
if i have 2.5k dropping from the sky right now, my next buy will be the 70-200 VR
if u shoot closeups, this extra 9cm closer (albeit u lose 5mm focal length on the tamron) might be more important.
I found a way to get round the screwy AF with the tammy/d300 combi, for AF. use AFC instead of AF-S. i found that i miss far fewer shots this way. sure, u do get OOF shots cos the tamron is inferior in AF, but the camera is smart enuff to keep the subject in focus most of the time if u keep pressing half shutter.
use with 51 point AF for best effects :thumbsup:
my usual was to use AF-S. sometimes the AF will "hang" and i simply miss my shot. for now, seems like this problem is solved for the tamron.
in view of the closer min focus dist, i've decided to abandon the idea of getting the nikon 17-55. it used to be on my short list of stuff to get (or lust after). instead, i will get a 35mm F2 for now.
if i have 2.5k dropping from the sky right now, my next buy will be the 70-200 VR
another link here.
http://www.bythom.com/1750lens.htm
i personally faced this problem myself. but i seldom used direct flash with TTL BL. if u want to, the tamron doesn't work at all. i was wondering why i had some shots horridly exposed even with nikon's legendary TTL flash metering.. :dunno: until i saw the info on CS :thumbsup:
i also dun find that the AF works as well as thom describes. but i've said enuff abt it already ;p
- Status
