my tamron 17-50 not sharp 2... help


Status
Not open for further replies.
DSCI0355-1.jpg


See the above pic taken at f2.8. Is it sharp? I'm not sure, maybe must look at my original file. When i purchased my Tamron, i just check for front focus issues. I took a few photo shots from f2.8 to f11 for testing. I'm not a pro, so i'm not sure what type of sharp are you looking at. But for me, as long as the pics are relatively sharp and reasonable, i'm fine.

If you chance upon the Canon 17-55 and make a comparison, you will think that Canon is sharper. Why make ourselves so miserable over the so-called sharpness, just enjoy the hobbies and take more shots. Otherwise, after a while and you see another so-called sharp lens, you will make comparison and felt miserable again.
Ok this is same as what i encountered. I shot with f2.8 at grass in front, bush and tress behind. Photos turned out to be so blur.

I got quite shocked how come this expensive lens can't even get sharp image quality like my 3 year-old pns sony camera.

Ok now i think i know....i must go out and shoot with f4.5 and above to get sharp image. But then..what's the point of this piece of expensive lens?? Even 18-55mm VR kit lens can do better. Or this lens is supposed to be used for portrait shots with bokeh only?
 

Ok this is same as what i encountered. I shot with f2.8 at grass in front, bush and tress behind. Photos turned out to be so blur.

I got quite shocked how come this expensive lens can't even get sharp image quality like my 3 year-old pns sony camera.

Ok now i think i know....i must go out and shoot with f4.5 and above to get sharp image. But then..what's the point of this piece of expensive lens?? Even 18-55mm VR kit lens can do better. Or this lens is supposed to be used for portrait shots with bokeh only?
That's essentially the purpose of getting a fast lens...
(a) isolating the subject eg human head, half-body, full-body portrait shots, another other animate or inanimate subjects, from the background which is blurred when lens is wide opened...and
(b) 'die-die-must-shoot' shots without flash under low light conditions ;)
 

That's essentially the purpose of getting a fast lens...
(a) isolating the subject eg human head, half-body, full-body portrait shots, another other animate or inanimate subjects, from the background which is blurred when lens is wide opened...and
(b) 'die-die-must-shoot' shots without flash under low light conditions ;)

well said.. took the words outta my mouth. Think Mr Jelly has solved his problem of blurness
 

...Ok now i think i know....i must go out and shoot with f4.5 and above to get sharp image. But then..what's the point of this piece of expensive lens??

Thats not true as well. no where near the OOF photos I see posted.

Tink this site will be very useful for you.
http://www.pixel-peeper.com

See all the photos taken with your lens.
Even select to view those eg. only f2.8

If none of your shots remotely matches the sharpness you see there, then obviously either you're doing something wrong or unfortunately you got a 'lemon'...
 

Last edited:
doesn't mean use fast lens must always shoot at max aperture to get yr money's worth. Av mode is there for u to control the aperture (and hence DOF) based on the type of photo.

if the situation calls for stopping down to f4, f5.6 or f8, (e.g. landscapes, group shots), insisting on shooting at f2.8 will only compromise your DOF and leave something OOF.

but there are of course situations when you will want to shoot at f2.8, as mentioned by tomcat. either by choice or by bopian.:bsmilie:
 

Ok this is same as what i encountered. I shot with f2.8 at grass in front, bush and tress behind. Photos turned out to be so blur.

I got quite shocked how come this expensive lens can't even get sharp image quality like my 3 year-old pns sony camera.

Ok now i think i know....i must go out and shoot with f4.5 and above to get sharp image. But then..what's the point of this piece of expensive lens?? Even 18-55mm VR kit lens can do better. Or this lens is supposed to be used for portrait shots with bokeh only?

DO YOU EVEN KNOW YOUR STUFFS!!!
1855 is at f5.6 of cos all is sharp do you even know DOF???

#2 you compressed you jpeg till so low res how to tell!!!...if you cant used it right doesn't mean its broken!!!

to TS try to lock and recompose

i shoot wide open and lemme show you 1750 at f2.8 its straight out of camera and i am using a FUJI which isn't the sharpest of cameras!!!

3098636067_97a61ff2e8.jpg


anyway to TS you guys need to read more. and to MR JELLY for tat statement you made. go use the 1855 VR. Try the 55/1.2 and you realized it s super soft at 1.2 till i dunno if its my fault or the lens but than again why the hell of you wish to shoot at 1.2?? again the 1750 is not an expensive lens as compared and btw its my most expensive lens i own to date
 

Last edited:
thanks again for all the constructive advice;

i promised i will try harder;

edited title b4 i get bashed by the experts...

cheers



PS: i maybe old but i can still remember i learn to walk b4 i can run...
 

DO YOU EVEN KNOW YOUR STUFFS!!!
1855 is at f5.6 of cos all is sharp do you even know DOF???

#2 you compressed you jpeg till so low res how to tell!!!...if you cant used it right doesn't mean its broken!!!

to TS try to lock and recompose

i shoot wide open and lemme show you 1750 at f2.8 its straight out of camera and i am using a FUJI which isn't the sharpest of cameras!!!

3098636067_97a61ff2e8.jpg


anyway to TS you guys need to read more. and to MR JELLY for tat statement you made. go use the 1855 VR. Try the 55/1.2 and you realized it s super soft at 1.2 till i dunno if its my fault or the lens but than again why the hell of you wish to shoot at 1.2?? again the 1750 is not an expensive lens as compared and btw its my most expensive lens i own to date
bro, urs look so sharp...

I didnt compress my jpeg. They are straight out from camera. :embrass:
 

i think there is a 100kb limit hosting pics on CS. :dunno:
So once you resize, save in the largest and best quality.
 

bro, urs look so sharp...

I didnt compress my jpeg. They are straight out from camera. :embrass:

bro yours is also
just AF-L and release that shutter. i have own 3 Tamron lenses so far. 2875 both with motored and non-motored and this 1750 and so far all are okay.. hope it helps.. just your technique
 

bro, urs look so sharp...

I didnt compress my jpeg. They are straight out from camera. :embrass:

Are you shooting jpeg fine? seems yours is set to basic
 

doesn't mean use fast lens must always shoot at max aperture to get yr money's worth. Av mode is there for u to control the aperture (and hence DOF) based on the type of photo.

if the situation calls for stopping down to f4, f5.6 or f8, (e.g. landscapes, group shots), insisting on shooting at f2.8 will only compromise your DOF and leave something OOF.

but there are of course situations when you will want to shoot at f2.8, as mentioned by tomcat. either by choice or by bopian.:bsmilie:

I think these statements basically explained why f2.8 is used for certain portraits (bokeh) and when smaller aperture is required for landscape.:)

TS should probably do some reading up on aperture, DOF, etc, which i'm still learning too.:)
 

I think these statements basically explained why f2.8 is used for certain portraits (bokeh) and when smaller aperture is required for landscape.:)

TS should probably do some reading up on aperture, DOF, etc, which i'm still learning too.:)

nice gears.. i am only shooting with a tamron 1750 :D and a old 105 manual focus
 

Few things to check.
1.Was the subject on the same plane when you recomposed after locking the shutter button?
2.Is your focussing mode on single servo or AI?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top