Test Shots from my new Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di II ( with built in motor)

[thengz]

Ha this is turning into a thread full of test shots which shld help pple make their choices.
Mine at f2.8 35mm

Hey TS, think the exposure you took for this photo is from the light outside the window. Hence the under-exposure. And from what I see, the focal point of the picture should be the helmet (actually not sure if it is a helmet, but thats what I gather from the picture), hence you should set exposure for the helmet itself. Unless, this is an artistic picture, then forget about my comments, cause beauty is the eye of the beholder.

Just commenting to help, not criticize!

 

[calebk]

no doubt the TS shots are way too random (doesnt show the full potential of the lens), but it is possible to take a decent pic even without pp is just that needs years of shooting to get there.
pp is just a shortcut way to adjust settings when you forget to do it in the cam.
so cut him some slack there (who knows he might just be a rookie only)...this is not really a critque sub-forum after all.

to TS maybe you can try taking test shots of sharpness lvl instead.
or you can close this thread and move on before some words really get to you.
likewise AG outings is a gd way to learn especially when there is less equipment talk.

I would like to reinstate that PP can come in two forms:

1) Cover-my-ass, 'cause I forgot to do something at the point of the shot
2) Enhance a certain quality of the photo

A lot of people have misconceptions that photoshop is solely used as a cover up for any errors; that is not the intention of my PP.

If you do extensive B&W digital photography, you will understand the need for a solid PP workflow to get the best contrast, sometimes even with 2-3hours spent on burning and dodging to enhance the way the light falls.

This photo (not shot with a 17-50, but for illustration purposes) took two hours to convert from its initial colour state to the final monochrome product. Note especially the more 3-dimensional feel, because of extensive burning on the shadow areas, plus dodging in the highlights. There is no way to achieve this "pop" out of camera.

 

[cereal]

wow.. is it a cross back? nice scales

this is my take using the lens.

value for money lens.

 

[entropy_h]

I would like to reinstate that PP can come in two forms:

1) Cover-my-ass, 'cause I forgot to do something at the point of the shot
2) Enhance a certain quality of the photo

A lot of people have misconceptions that photoshop is solely used as a cover up for any errors; that is not the intention of my PP.

If you do extensive B&W digital photography, you will understand the need for a solid PP workflow to get the best contrast, sometimes even with 2-3hours spent on burning and dodging to enhance the way the light falls.

This photo (not shot with a 17-50, but for illustration purposes) took two hours to convert from its initial colour state to the final monochrome product. Note especially the more 3-dimensional feel, because of extensive burning on the shadow areas, plus dodging in the highlights. There is no way to achieve this "pop" out of camera.

OT a bit. Superb, love this shot.

 

[Simon_84]

like this b&w thread better...amazing how old generation cam can do.

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=372230

 

[EdOkH]

wow.. is it a cross back? nice scales

na... it's a tongyan. took this pic to show the colour of the scales. guess i didn't do it properly to bring across the right message...:bsmilie:

 

[calebk]

like this b&w thread better...amazing how old generation cam can do.

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=372230

Ok thanks for the heads up.

 

[sunboi80]

This is my snapshot... just testing the bokeh of the lens...the poor fluorescent light at my hse is very bad.. .te colors all damn jialat..

good? the 2nd toy was just abt 5cm behind the monkey in the foreground...
i feel it's pretty good...

 

[zhikang]

hahahah if i culd chup in abit... been using this lens (Canon Mount) for almost a year, a real workhorse that produces EXCELLENT pics for its price point. Pic quality is very very very very close to Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 IS. I would even say in some areas it is superior to the 17-55 (the lens gives warmer colours in general, mine does =P, great for portraits and outdoors but gets abit =S during indoor shoots wif warm lighting) Anw here're some of my shots. Open to comment. =D

to the TS: pls, without photoshopping i wuldnt have been able to achieve this colour scheme and hence the mood and effect. i.e. post-processing is essential to good pics. i still have lots to learn from the various masters here hahahhaa

bokehhhhhh

playing wif wide angle distortion. intentional. =P

 

[JaPhotos]

erm...since this thread is talking abt the new tamron lens and I just got my

Not wanting to say who's right or wrong...anyway..i think its a good lens, here are some of my take to share (I'm no expert ok....so don't expect much).

Sunflowers

Hort Park Greenhouse

Hort Park Event Hall

 

[calebk]

erm...since this thread is talking abt the new tamron lens and I just got my

Not wanting to say who's right or wrong...anyway..i think its a good lens, here are some of my take to share (I'm no expert ok....so don't expect much).
...

Were these processed? Vibrant colours!

 

[Azure]

The Tamron 17-50 is quite capable of lovely pics. I won't speak for others, but these are pp-free, straight out-of-camera.

 

[Zichar]

Shucks Azure, that's awesome!

 

[shirak]

great stuff, Azure. I think the TS should understand fully now

 

[Shawn]

This lens is also good for near close ups of food and stuff

 

[JaPhotos]

only slight increase of the levels in Aperture. But my D50 is always set at +1 sat, Fine JPG. =)
Personally I like my photos with stronger colors. hehehe. is it too strong?

 

[JaPhotos]

Azure, wah! I just had my late breakfast but looking at your pics make me want to eat again! haha

 

[calebk]

only slight increase of the levels in Aperture. But my D50 is always set at +1 sat, Fine JPG. =)
Personally I like my photos with stronger colors. hehehe. is it too strong?

Think it is not to the point where it's oversaturated so methinks it's fine. My gosh I'm hungry too.

 

[Dearboy87]

well this isn't a forum to comment on skills, those were just some random shots taken to show what the lens is capable of without thinking so much on composition and I do not think there is a problem with exposure, since i was just trying to capture the same light conditions as my eye sees without compensation. Why don't you show us some pics which do justification to the lens then?

As you request, i won't say i am doing justification, atleast these won't stop people from buying this great piece of lens.​

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=378648​

PS: i know is not wonderful shots =)

 

[wxwayne]

=) great thread with all the different focal lengths and apertures.

Finally took the lens out for a walk so here are a few from Vesak Day. Straight off the cam. No image enhancement. Resized in photoshop.

2nd pic can see some vignetting at the top left corner which is a little bit of a problem with this lens.