OK. Thanks for the tips.
Tamron 17-50 f2.8
- Thread starter Xiao_shin
- Start date
- Status
OK. Thanks for the tips.
Guys i'm still thinking should i change my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 lens for this Tamron lens... heard quite a lot of good feedback from many people.
These are the pics i took wif my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 lens. Wonder if the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 can perform better... If it could i would like to change. Anyway this lens has a longer range but again the Tamron have a wider range... :think:
These are the pics i took wif my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 lens. Wonder if the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 can perform better... If it could i would like to change. Anyway this lens has a longer range but again the Tamron have a wider range... :think:
miniUltraman
Senior Member
Very sharp sigma, you have. Keep it... 24-70 is a good focal length.. get the tamron 17-50 to supplement it instead :thumbsup:
To keep this lens and buy another 17-50mm f2.8?? that be heavy... haha
Hi, i think the Tamron "bokeh" is nicer.
Depends on your shooting conditions, camera-to-subject distance, aperture that you're shooting at, and the nature of the background.
Theoretically speaking, the 24-70 will have better bokeh if both are shooting at f/2.8 at their longest focal length because there is higher perspective compression at 70mm than 50mm.
StrifeYun
Senior Member
calebk should be right about the DOF theory 
Since you sigma is also a f/2.8, unless you need a wider lens with out changing lens den you should consider the tamron at the expense of the extra zoom.
you could consider the ef-s 10-22mm hehe which would add nicly (is you do not already have)
2 shillings
Since you sigma is also a f/2.8, unless you need a wider lens with out changing lens den you should consider the tamron
at the expense of the extra zoom.you could consider the ef-s 10-22mm hehe which would add nicly (is you do not already have)
2 shillings
StreetShooter
Senior Member
The difference between 17mm and 24mm at the wide end is much greater than between 50mm and 70mm at the telephoto end. In other words, you won't find much difference between 50mm and 70mm, but you will find a GREAT difference between 17mm and 24mm.
I find that 24mm is a little too restrictive on a 1.6X crop factor. But it depends on the kind of shooter you are. I'm the type that likes to get real close. Many photographers shoot from a respectable distance, so the 24-70 would suit them better. I had one and loved it very much. But sold it off because I hardly used it after getting my 17-50.
I find that 24mm is a little too restrictive on a 1.6X crop factor. But it depends on the kind of shooter you are. I'm the type that likes to get real close. Many photographers shoot from a respectable distance, so the 24-70 would suit them better. I had one and loved it very much. But sold it off because I hardly used it after getting my 17-50.
That's what I'm doing now :embrass: . At first bought the 17-50 and then the 24-75 (tamron one). Wanted to sell off the 17-50 but in the end I simply keep it on top of my other lens.
I just got the lens to test and i love its f2.8 for its price range.
Got a question about crop factor though~~
I use a 350D since its a DII lens does it mean i am able to get a true 17mm on my camera?
and comparing witht the sigma 18-50 DC. it seems that i still have to multiply 18x1.6 for the sigma. Is it ture?
Got a question about crop factor though~~
I use a 350D since its a DII lens does it mean i am able to get a true 17mm on my camera?
and comparing witht the sigma 18-50 DC. it seems that i still have to multiply 18x1.6 for the sigma. Is it ture?
You crop ANY lens.
Your sensor is smaller than a 35mm negative. No matter what lens you mount, the sensor is still smaller right? So, that means you crop no matter what lens you mount.
hmm thats not what i am reading here~~ check out page 7 and 8
http://www.tamron.com/lenses/assets/pdfs/A014_quick_guide.pdf
also canon EF-S 17-55mm does that mean i have to multiply by a crop factor too?
hmm... so many variations of "specially designed for the smaller sensor" . from tamron theres DII for sigma there is DC, canon theres EF-S.....
mtunlinn
New Member
Yes. You have to multiply the focal length with the crop factor no matter what lens you use.
For your 17-50, it is effectively 17x1.6, 50x1.6 = 27.2-80 mm. Hope it helps.
But the perspective is different. 27 mm (effective) on your 350D is not as distortion free as 27 mm on 5D with full frame lens.
For your 17-50, it is effectively 17x1.6, 50x1.6 = 27.2-80 mm. Hope it helps.
But the perspective is different. 27 mm (effective) on your 350D is not as distortion free as 27 mm on 5D with full frame lens.
Yes yes yes. You crop any lens. How can a lens possibly alter the physical size of your sensor?
What was it exactly that you were reading? I suggest you read through the articles carefully again.
For the benefits of those who are traveling to Taipei City.
I just bought the Tamrom 17-50 f2.8 for NT11,500, if you are not worried about the intl' warranty, then get it!
The shop was very nice to let me choose from their 6 lens stocks... checked one by one.. to find the best copy. :bsmilie:
I just bought the Tamrom 17-50 f2.8 for NT11,500, if you are not worried about the intl' warranty, then get it!
The shop was very nice to let me choose from their 6 lens stocks... checked one by one.. to find the best copy. :bsmilie:
- Status
Similar threads
