Choosing between Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 on D300.

[luntut]

i had great expectations for my 17-55. ended up falling on my face.

its just not as sharp as I hoped for it to be wide open, with the subject far away..

the resolution power just cant make it.. i need to set the sharpening to a really high level on my cam.. an that ended up losing some details...

 

[TheChef]

Then why would anyone wanna buy 2nd hand tamron if its just a $100 difference?

Going by your post, it seems to me that the 2nd hand Nikkor is very value for money. =)

Regards

Hi bro, it is not just empty talk. Just check out the transactions done during the past few weeks in the buy and sell section of this forum and you will agree with me. Yes, IMHO a second hand Nikkor 17-55mm is going for a steal now with more brothas going FX. I am really surprised that a used Tamron 17-50mm can be sold at $520 when a new one costs just $630. From my calculation, a used good condition Nikkor 17-55mm should rightfully be selling at $1,650 - $1,700 now with the recent price increase in new Nikkor lenses. Getting it at $1,350 - $1,450 is a steal, especially if it is in mint condition or condition 10, as advertised, as a new piece costs about $2,360. The strange thing is nobody is buying even though it is a steal. :dunno:

 

[TheChef]

i had great expectations for my 17-55. ended up falling on my face.

its just not as sharp as I hoped for it to be wide open, with the subject far away..

the resolution power just cant make it.. i need to set the sharpening to a really high level on my cam.. an that ended up losing some details...

The 17-55 is a good lens IMHO. Can you post some pictures here for us to analyse why you are saying that the image quality made you fall on your face? It may not be perfect...which DX zoom lens is anyway? But, the image quality must be quite terrible to make you say this. Could you have bought a reconditioned or lemon? Thanks.

 

[Omega23]

Hi bro, it is not just empty talk. Just check out the transactions done during the past few weeks in the buy and sell section of this forum and you will agree with me. Yes, IMHO a second hand Nikkor 17-55mm is going for a steal now with more brothas going FX. I am really surprised that a used Tamron 17-50mm can be sold at $520 when a new one costs just $630. From my calculation, a used good condition Nikkor 17-55mm should rightfully be selling at $1,650 - $1,700 now with the recent price increase in new Nikkor lenses. Getting it at $1,350 - $1,450 is a steal, especially if it is in mint condition or condition 10, as advertised, as a new piece costs about $2,360. The strange thing is nobody is buying even though it is a steal. :dunno:

This is because of the FX fever.. i believe not many ppl would fork out so much for a DX lens. Even now i am trying to get FX lens to replace all my DX lens and wait for the FX body to drop. Furthermore the tamron 17-50mm really "kills" the nikkor 17-55mm interm of IQ/price.

 

[Legoz]

Hi bro, it is not just empty talk. Just check out the transactions done during the past few weeks in the buy and sell section of this forum and you will agree with me. Yes, IMHO a second hand Nikkor 17-55mm is going for a steal now with more brothas going FX. I am really surprised that a used Tamron 17-50mm can be sold at $520 when a new one costs just $630. From my calculation, a used good condition Nikkor 17-55mm should rightfully be selling at $1,650 - $1,700 now with the recent price increase in new Nikkor lenses. Getting it at $1,350 - $1,450 is a steal, especially if it is in mint condition or condition 10, as advertised, as a new piece costs about $2,360. The strange thing is nobody is buying even though it is a steal. :dunno:

I agree with you.
And thats why im in the opinion that the 2nd hand Nikkor presents a more worthwhile buy than the 2nd hand Tamron lens.
If i were indeed buying a Tamron 17-50, why would i wanna buy 2nd hand when its only a $100 difference?

Sidenote on the BnS forum...
Most of the 'just passed warranty lens' may be 5 years old and theres serious nothing that the buyer can do to verify..
Anyway, most sellers in BnS are usually very optimistic with their pricing. =)

Regards

 

[jimbok]

One reason I did not get the Tamron is because of the Tamron agent locally. Seems some bros are having problem servicing their Tamron lens, taking like more than 3 months to service it. Other than that, the quality seems to be great for the price you paid.

 

[YSLee]

Photozone's review actually shows the Tamron to be better than the Nikkor. Could be sample variance though.

 

[boyboy]

also in the dilemna now.

For me I thot if the Tammy screws up the TTL BL flash mode, then how could I workaround this problem? Under-expose my flash EC?

Because i shoot a lot in flash, if the tammy is unable to perform well in it, then I would go for the nikkor and sacrifice all the advantages in weight/price

use normal TTL mode and u'll be fine. BL doesn't work because the tammy doesn't send the correct distance information to the camera. but i don't find that this affects any other function than TTL BL. love my tammy :thumbsup:

 

[boyboy]

My take using said lense with motor. No PP just size.
Been using this since the day I bought it.
Goin to KL again next month. And guess which lense Im using ? ...

Its sharp enough for my eyes.
Well, if you have the money, get the nikon.
If you wanna save, go for this lense.
Seriously ... this lense has got potential ...

As to me, it all falls on the user behind the camera .. just me o.o2 cents ...

frankly, u post this kinda picture size, even 18-55 nikon lens also will give good results ;p

but i think these lenses are all good. it's up to the user. i haven't had the opportunity to use sucky lenses yet. (have not used all that many anyway)

 

[jimbok]

frankly, u post this kinda picture size, even 18-55 nikon lens also will give good results ;p

but i think these lenses are all good. it's up to the user. i haven't had the opportunity to use sucky lenses yet. (have not used all that many anyway)

Hmm... Sucky lens... hmm.. :dunno:

From my point of view, there's no such things as sucky lens. Problem always or most of the time lies within the man behind the camera. :sticktong

 

[AbangR]

Hmm... Sucky lens... hmm.. :dunno:

From my point of view, there's no such things as sucky lens. Problem always or most of the time lies within the man behind the camera. :sticktong

True.

For amateurs like me, my skills can not reveal the differences between $200 and $2000 lenses. In the right hands, however, we should be able see sucky vs. superb lens performance mismatch.

 

[stupidbear]

I just parted with my Tamron 17-50... it's a good lens for it's price.

 

[ricardsonwilliams]

Nikon 17-55 its pro grade lens! its Sharp, Well contruction and very fast(AF-S) its much better than Tamron in many aspects.

I have 17-55 six months now, I'm pretty sure this lens its really sharp and fast.

Street Shot - Hong Kong

 

[luntut]

The 17-55 is a good lens IMHO. Can you post some pictures here for us to analyse why you are saying that the image quality made you fall on your face? It may not be perfect...which DX zoom lens is anyway? But, the image quality must be quite terrible to make you say this. Could you have bought a reconditioned or lemon? Thanks.

probably so. i never had any qualms that this is indeed the king of DX. but i had my doubts, that should a king perfrom like this?? i am getting better IQ and quality from my 70-300 VR at 250mm then this fella at 55mm.

Original image:

100% crop of his head:

settings: 55mm @ f/2.8, 1/1250s. sharpness at 3. ISO400, no flash.

does this look normal? i think i can rule out handshake at such a high shutter speed (unless i got really bad parkinsons). my 70-300 has way better resolving power at f/5.6 250mm then this fella. the hair is all blurred out. The 17-55 is supposed to be really sharp wide open. Is this sharp? to me its not. or am I expecting too much?

 

[earthling82]

probably so. i never had any qualms that this is indeed the king of DX. but i had my doubts, that should a king perfrom like this?? i am getting better IQ and quality from my 70-300 VR at 250mm then this fella at 55mm.

settings: 55mm @ f/2.8, 1/1250s. sharpness at 3. ISO400, no flash.

does this look normal? i think i can rule out handshake at such a high shutter speed (unless i got really bad parkinsons). my 70-300 has way better resolving power at f/5.6 250mm then this fella. the hair is all blurred out. The 17-55 is supposed to be really sharp wide open. Is this sharp? to me its not. or am I expecting too much?

Hi

Forgive me but i believe your subject is moving........

1) Are you focusing on the face when you shoot

2) Between your half-press shutter and full release, how long was the delay. Even a one second delay can translate to a subject movement (subject shake). In this case your subject is clearly walking already

3) Other than subject shake, the DOF could have been another factor. You shouldn't be comparing like this from 55mm/F2.8 and 250mm/F5.6. Unless you do controlled studio shots where you have the photos results side-by-side then will be more convincing


my 2 cents opinions. Forgive me for being rather frank

 

[luntut]

Hi

Forgive me but i believe your subject is moving........

1) Are you focusing on the face when you shoot

2) Between your half-press shutter and full release, how long was the delay. Even a one second delay can translate to a subject movement (subject shake). In this case your subject is clearly walking.

3) Other than subject shake, the DOF could have been another factor. You shouldn't be comparing like this from 55mm/F2.8 and 250mm/F5.6. Unless you do controlled studio shots where you have the photos results side-by-side then will be more convincing


my 2 cents opinions. Forgive me for being rather frank

no offenses at all bro. i rather pple be frank with me. i can handle it.

i was also thinking of the points you mentioned. i was actually leaning towards the fact that the DOF might be rather thin at 55mm at 2.8. i will probably need to try out at f/4 or something to prove it. but i did try mounting it on a tripod. and the pictures i got were softer at 2.8 then at 5.6 naturally. other then tat, i din really test fine details like hair..

1. focus box is always over their faces. i made sure of that.

2. the phto was taken on the second day. i made sure once my dot comes up on my viewfinder, i fired off. so from lock on to delay, not significant till 1sec lidat.

subject is definitely moving. but the point is that, how can those pro fashion photogs achieve great, fine detail shots of moving subjects like them, at very big apertures of 2.8 or more... something i cant seem to get.

 

[IamJeFfy]

did you use S or C servo?

 

[luntut]

this shot was taken with S, because the previous day i thought the C-servo was not working as well as i thought. so switched to S servo to try... both days my photos turned out pretty mych the same.

 

[IamJeFfy]

try shoot f/4 or f/5.6 next time.

a f/2.8 lens doesn't mean must shoot f/2.8 all the time. ;p

usually stop down 2 stops for the "best performance".

 

[earthling82]

2. the phto was taken on the second day. i made sure once my dot comes up on my viewfinder, i fired off. so from lock on to delay, not significant till 1sec lidat.

subject is definitely moving. but the point is that, how can those pro fashion photogs achieve great, fine detail shots of moving subjects like them, at very big apertures of 2.8 or more... something i cant seem to get.

That means u are using 51 point AF right? Between the time the dslr focused and the dot in your viewfinder come up can translate to a 1 second delay. Hence confirm blur. Haven even consider the time u saw the dot and fully depress shutter release - maybe another second.

Also i don't think S or C servo differs too much. Basically even for C-Servo it is not fast enough at all to focus-lock on a constantly moving subject. Just do a try ya...

On fashion photographers, I suspect they pre-focused a "Sharp Zone" for walking subjects. Therefore at a certain zone - say 10 meters in front of camera, all subject will be sharp throughout. So they simply wait for the model to walk into the "Sharp Zone" and once in, simply shutter release.