Tamron 17-50 f2.8

[clicknick]

yup clicknick, your portrait pics seem alright to me too.
Enjoy your new toy and Keep shooting.
Got wedding need PA let me know.

:sweat: I am also a PA

 

[2100]

Bokeh looks pretty ok.

At 17mm/2.8, that kind of center quality can do S8R easily already.

 

[volk]

Hi guys,

Any update on this lens? Users can feedback?

So is the Nikon mount available in Sg already? Price is still high $600?

Thanks

 

[clicknick]

Here is another one of my soft pic taken with this lens 50mm f/2.8 ISO 400 1/50s

Resized

100% crop

 

[pianodancer]

Here is another one of my soft pic taken with this lens 50mm f/2.8 ISO 400 1/50s

100% crop

That doesn't look soft to me at all. Excellent lens!

 

[Reyon]

Looks good !!

Now headache
got 4 lens in mind

1. Tamron 17-50
2. Sigma 18-50
3. Sigma 17-70
4. Tokina 16-50

 

[joey91]

1. Tamron 17-50 --still waiting for nikon mount
2. Sigma 18-50 -- $810 w/gst
3. Sigma 17-70 -- $620
4. Tokina 16-50 -- haven on sale

:sweat: dunno how to choose...

 

[htthach]

1/ I suggest buy second hand 18-50 @ $500-550
Saw many ppl love their sigma 18-50.
Last time i try to find that lens second hand but cannot. Now got few buddy selling in B&S.
2/ If wanna try the 17-70, can come to my place at Dover, very near NUS. (canon mount)
3/ Don need to buy brand new 3rd party lens (price drop fast) in case you wanna change lens later on, you'll never know.
I bought 17-70 thinking that i never change, very good for me upto now.
But this after noon I tried out a friend's canon 24-105 IS USM L lens and I just so love it, wanna change, wanna change hahaha. (of course cannot afford that $2000++ lens, just day dreaming only). However, still live with my 17-70 for long time lah. Dunno what could i get if sell my 17-70 haha.

 

[joey91]

1/ I suggest buy second hand 18-50 @ $500-550
Saw many ppl love their sigma 18-50.
Last time i try to find that lens second hand but cannot. Now got few buddy selling in B&S.
2/ If wanna try the 17-70, can come to my place at Dover, very near NUS. (canon mount)
3/ Don need to buy brand new 3rd party lens (price drop fast) in case you wanna change lens later on, you'll never know.
I bought 17-70 thinking that i never change, very good for me upto now.
But this after noon I tried out a friend's canon 24-105 IS USM L lens and I just so love it, wanna change, wanna change hahaha. (of course cannot afford that $2000++ lens, just day dreaming only). However, still live with my 17-70 for long time lah. Dunno what could i get if sell my 17-70 haha.

actually i got thinking to buy nikon 17-55 / 2.8, but 2.1k leh...:sweat: merge with my D50 isit too pity???:think: so thinking again buy the sigma 18-50 / 2.8 for my D50... :dunno: tamron , tokina still new n haven on sale...
wat should i do???
sigh!!!

 

[pianodancer]

actually i got thinking to buy nikon 17-55 / 2.8, but 2.1k leh...:sweat: merge with my D50 isit too pity???:think: so thinking again buy the sigma 18-50 / 2.8 for my D50... :dunno: tamron , tokina still new n haven on sale...
wat should i do???
sigh!!!

If you can afford it, buy Nikon 17-55. That lens will last you longer than the body. Who knows, you might change to D2X in a few months.

I'm also struggling whether to spend my fortune on Nikon 17-55, but I've decided after reading so many mixed reviews that the extra premium is not worth it. Apparently, you can never be assured of a good Nikon lens all the time - you might get poor copies. At least if you get poor 3rd party copies, you don't feel so heartache - pay less mah. 17-35 is definitely an optically more superior lens, and I wouldn't mind paying for it, but alas the range is too small.

 

[joey91]

If you can afford it, buy Nikon 17-55. That lens will last you longer than the body. Who knows, you might change to D2X in a few months.

I'm also struggling whether to spend my fortune on Nikon 17-55, but I've decided after reading so many mixed reviews that the extra premium is not worth it. Apparently, you can never be assured of a good Nikon lens all the time - you might get poor copies. At least if you get poor 3rd party copies, you don't feel so heartache - pay less mah. 17-35 is definitely an optically more superior lens, and I wouldn't mind paying for it, but alas the range is too small.

:sweat: :dunno:

 

[honda]

My advice is to buy second hand so if dont like can sell later at about the same price provided its a popular lens. Unless very sure you like it so much and will never sell or want the latest and newest and dont mind the premium.
http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com

 

[thw]

Apparently, you can never be assured of a good Nikon lens all the time - you might get poor copies. At least if you get poor 3rd party copies, you don't feel so heartache - pay less mah.

If you get a poor Canon/Nikon lens because of decentering or focus issues, you can at least get them fixed or replaced at the service centers. Likewise for Sigma.

But what can you do if you get a lousy Tamron or Tokina lens? :dunno:

 

[Garion]

If you can afford it, buy Nikon 17-55. That lens will last you longer than the body. Who knows, you might change to D2X in a few months.

I'm also struggling whether to spend my fortune on Nikon 17-55, but I've decided after reading so many mixed reviews that the extra premium is not worth it. Apparently, you can never be assured of a good Nikon lens all the time - you might get poor copies. At least if you get poor 3rd party copies, you don't feel so heartache - pay less mah. 17-35 is definitely an optically more superior lens, and I wouldn't mind paying for it, but alas the range is too small.

I kinda disagree with your logic there. What you're implying is that Nikon's QC is poor...that is definitely not the case (and I am not a Nikon zealot/supporter...I use Canon btw). True, there is no such thing as being assured of 100% perfect copies of OEM lenses everytime, occasionally you might get lemons, and this is true for the big two even (N & C brands). But c'mon lar it is not that bad as you envisaged. If you are buying new, and suay suay kena a lemon, usually most shops allow you to come back within one week of purchase for one to one exchange if you feel the lens is not up to par. Alternatively, if its front/back focus issue (as is most commonly the case encountered for new lens), since the lens is under warranty you can still send it in to the respective Service Centre to have it calibrated for free.

With Nikon lenses, you get what you pay for. Better quality, build, long term assurance, better and more efficient customer service and turnaround times for servicing required. You can always sell it off for a minimal loss if you feel you don't need it later. (and demand for this range of lens is there). Also, the possibility of lemon is much lower with original lenses compared to when purchasing 3rd party equipment. Sure, you pay less for 3rd party, but as they always say, what you pay is what you get.

I do not have a grudge against 3rd party equipment, I've used and still have 3rd party lenses, and some of these are really great stuff. But what I want to say is that IF you can afford it and your need warrants it, just go for it, you definitely can't go wrong with original manufacturer's lenses. At least you're assured of good performance as well as excellent service support (can't really say the same for 3rd party manufacturers).

Just get the AF-S 17-55mm f2.8, once you get it, no looking back and I am sure you will have no regrets. Trust me.

 

[clicknick]

If you get a poor Canon/Nikon lens because of decentering or focus issues, you can at least get them fixed or replaced at the service centers. Likewise for Sigma.

But what can you do if you get a lousy Tamron or Tokina lens? :dunno:

I have not tried the service for Tamron or Tokina before. Care to explain why we will be in trouble if we get a lousy Tamron or Tokina? They won't fix/replace faulty lenses under warranty? :dunno:

 

[Reyon]

I have tried the Tamron SC .
If they can't solved the problem, they will send to japan for servicing.

Any more pic from this Tamron 17-50mm f2.8

 

[joey91]

I have not tried the service for Tamron or Tokina before. Care to explain why we will be in trouble if we get a lousy Tamron or Tokina? They won't fix/replace faulty lenses under warranty? :dunno:

just only "what you pay is what you get. ".....
all brand got thier own perfomance... just only wat u think ,enjoy or not...
no more money ,then 3rd party len 1st, wait rich liao now upgrade lah!!! just my own thinking...:embrass:

 

[pianodancer]

The Nikon mount will be arriving in Singapore early next month. That's anytime from tomorrow!!!

 

[NE clicks clicks]

After reading thru all the posts on this thread, wonder if anybody out there would be able to make a comparison between the the Canon EF 17-40 f/4 L, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and the kit lens Canon EFS 18-55 f/3.5-5.6. I think it would be an interesting comparison as they fall on different price categories of ($1000+, $700+ and $200+ respectively) .
Wonder the price to pic quality would be worth paying for:think:

 

[clicknick]

After reading thru all the posts on this thread, wonder if anybody out there would be able to make a comparison between the the Canon EF 17-40 f/4 L, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and the kit lens Canon EFS 18-55 f/3.5-5.6. I think it would be an interesting comparison as they fall on different price categories of ($1000+, $700+ and $200+ respectively) .
Wonder the price to pic quality would be worth paying for:think:

The 2 canon lens u mentioned cannot shoot at f/2.8, and most people who buy the Tamron buys it for f/2.8, so is this a useful comparison? Maybe compare canon 16-35L, Sigma 18-50 and Tamron 17-50.