Tamron 17-50 f2.8

[biggulp]

The pictures are too small to judge sharpness. Would be helpful if you could post 100% crops.

 

[blazer_workz]

So far oni seen test shots from Tamron lens..and i find it rather good in terms of sharpness..anyone care to post the ultra sharp pictures that can be achieve by the Nikkor 17-55/f2.8, so we can make comparison is it really worth paying the extra for the sharpness..

 

[biggulp]

So far oni seen test shots from Tamron lens..and i find it rather good in terms of sharpness..anyone care to post the ultra sharp pictures that can be achieve by the Nikkor 17-55/f2.8, so we can make comparison is it really worth paying the extra for the sharpness..

Diminishing returns really set in after a certain point, and in this case the samples I've seen so far from this lens are very good considering the price. The Nikon or Canon equivalents may cost 3 times or more but they are definitely not three times as good. You'd have to pay a hefty sum just to get that very little bit of extra sharpness/color/contrast if you could even detect any.

 

[PapaWayne]

My another newbie shot.

 

[cosycatus]

is a minolta mount avaliable?

 

[biggulp]

is a minolta mount avaliable?

Yes, there is.

 

[cosycatus]

Yes, there is.

i mean locally...are they selling in any of the shops? for about how much?

 

[blazer_workz]

Diminishing returns really set in after a certain point, and in this case the samples I've seen so far from this lens are very good considering the price. The Nikon or Canon equivalents may cost 3 times or more but they are definitely not three times as good. You'd have to pay a hefty sum just to get that very little bit of extra sharpness/color/contrast if you could even detect any.

it seems tat tis Tamron lens has quiet all tat uses the Nikon or Canon equivalent..so i think its really worth buying..:thumbsup:

 

[clicknick]

it seems tat tis Tamron lens has quiet all tat uses the Nikon or Canon equivalent..so i think its really worth buying..:thumbsup:

Canon 17-55 2.8 has USM and IS, something which I will like very much in my Tamron ;p

 

[rawbean]

I'm considering this len for journalistic wedding day shooting purposes, has anyone done that? And how is it comparable to canon 17-40mm L F4 in this case?

I wish it's good enough so that i can save some bucks and get a Tamron SP AF90MM F/2.8 at the same time.

 

[rawbean]

Hi,

i got mine today @ CP after quick test, somehow love it enough to get it on the spot.

Here's a sample i just took @F2.8

 

[zaxh81]

D70s, resized and adjust colour,no sharpening.Exif intact.

 

[blazer_workz]

D70s, resized and adjust colour,no sharpening.Exif intact.

:thumbsup: Sharpness..

 

[PnS]

Hi,

i got mine today @ CP after quick test, somehow love it enough to get it on the spot.

Here's a sample i just took @F2.8

Do post more test shots :thumbsup:

 

[Lenscapes]

can this lens be use on film body? any vignetting? tks in advance

 

[pianodancer]

can this lens be use on film body? any vignetting? tks in advance

Not for film body, it will cause vignetting.

 

[harrynkl]

went to MS color. Sold out, whoa so fast:cry:

 

[Kongo]

My next target.. ;p

But seriously, the tamron cost less than 1/2 the price & with very close optical quality, is certainly better value for money.

Canon 17-55 2.8 has USM and IS, something which I will like very much in my Tamron ;p

 

[harrynkl]

My next target.. ;p

But seriously, the tamron cost less than 1/2 the price & with very close optical quality, is certainly better value for money.

yo bro want to buy together

 

[pianodancer]

went to MS color. Sold out, whoa so fast:cry:

Alan Photo Sim Lim has a few I saw early this week.