 |
|
Photodo stats
1102 lenses 428 MTF tests 74 in-depth photodo reviews 100+ users join each day Help the lens community by reviewing or rating a lens today via our lens search | Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR LD Aspherical (IF) Di11Page 1 of 1: 1 This fast standard zoom lens from Tamron is their entry into the superior performance, standard zoom built for cropped sensor category. With an aperture that opens to f/2.8 and an image circle that is suitable only for APS-C ‘cropped’ sensors, we take a look at how it performs.
Build and handling The AF mechanism is a little whiny, although not obtrusively so, and accurate although it takes a couple of small jerks to get there in low light. The finish is a good standard and not as plasticy as some of Tamron’s older offerings. Optical quality The control of CA is exceptionally good with even Imatest struggling to find any at most apertures and focal lengths. There were measurably incidences at the widest apertures, but they were well below the threshold where they might become visible to the eye. The only place where the lens lets itself down is in the control of distortion. At the longer 50mm end it is within the parameters of acceptability with a pincushion reading of 0.62% but at the wide end of 17mm it has jumped to a rather noticeable 4.39% barrel which is very noticeable. Fortunately it is one of the easier problems to solve in software.
Click on each comparision photo below to view full size versions
Below is our lens test data. To find out how to use these graphs look at this article: How we test lenses
Verdict In summary, the positive points of the SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di11 are: The negative points are: Check the latest price for the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 Di11 here Discuss this lens and other related lens subjects here Test by Ian Andrews www.wildaboutkent.com Given the realtively good MTF50 numbers for this lens, it would seem that the photos of the Meritime Museum are quite soft... I wondering what the explination for this is???
I agree with the previous writer and think all pics are quite soft. The imgae quality seems rather poor.
The aperture of the pics at the Maritime Museum is 2.8, so this explains the softness, since at F2.8 the lens is wide open. The reviewer says it: "The resolution is good, especially when stopped down by a stop...". I have the lens and it beats down most canon consumer primes at the equivalent focal distance in sharpness, with the exception (possibly) of 35mm F2. It's better than 24mm F2.8 and much better than 28mm F2.8. I don't own a 50mm F1.8 for the time being.
Most downloaded review pictures I ignore because they have been so oversharpened anyway that you cant tell. The reviewer should record with sharpening turned off and leave it to us to sharpen ourselves.
What bugs me most is that searching around I cant find ANY test shots of the museum door that ARE sharp edge to edge from any lens. Thats really scary. I often cannot read the notices in the middle and often the big letters become more blurred towards the edges. And the corners of this stone building are almost never sharp. We're not talking the hairs on someones chin, but BIG stones and mortar and foot high letters, so I just hold off buying, theres nothing being made worth having!! I had this lens when it first came out for my D-200
Sold it few months after. A true piece of garbage as far as optics go. It was so soft that even when stoped down to f5.6 the images seemed as they were shot with soft focus filter #4 At f2.8 there were simply all blurry unusable pictures Buy the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 (much better lens)if you don't have much money and need to have constant f2.8 But your best bet is to get Nikkor or Canon glass If you shoot Nikon than I would get the 35-70mm f2.8 which is tack sharp even wide open for about the same price used And use your kit lens for your wide shots. I think my Tamorn is much sharper than these images here show it to be , I mean my Tmaorn is much sharper than my 17-40L and almost as sharp as my EF-S17-55IS.
I think this is a little pretty lens if you do not need the Canon IS, though I need the IS and so I have both the EF-S17-55IS and this Tamorn. I mostly use this Tmaorn for travel light or day time , after getting this , I sold the EF50 f1.4 since my Tmaorn is as sharp as the prime if not sharper. So highly recommended. There are two manufacturing sites for the Tamron 17-50, one in Japan and one in Taiwan I believe. The latter's lenses have been known to front focus. I am interested in this Tamron model, though, because I've seen on several other web sites numerous sample photos taken with it which show it to have excellent sharpness. This is the only site that I have found which has presented soft samples from this lens. Maybe the one tested here is a Taiwan product. If I do decide to buy the Tamron 17-50, then I will be sure to ask if they have one made in Japan before buying. I won't buy the Taiwan version based on what I have read on the internet about it.
The dilemma for me is that it appears the only way to get excellent photos from Canon and Nikon is to spend big bucks on their high-end lenses. I was/am hoping this Tamron model offers some potential for obtaining a quality lense that doesn't break one's bank account. I may opt out on Canon and Nikon as options for developing an affordable, decent system because they both are more expensive than I will afford. I will probably go with the Olympus E-510 which has better kit lenses than Nikon or Canon and for a whole lot less money. I am concerned about some of the idiosynchrasies of the E-510, but am willing to try to work around them just because of the high cost of Canon and Nikon glass. Part of the problem is that the zoom ranges for quality lenses from Canon and Nikon make it difficult to cover a breadth of focal lengths unless you buy a minimum of three lenses. For instance, if I had the bucks, I'd buy the Canon 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 L/F4 IS, but that's not going to happen. As it is now, I'm probably going to go with Olympus's 14-54 (28-108 equiv.), which is not much more expensive than the Tamron model, the 40-150 kit lens (80-300 equiv.), and get their 50mm F2 macro to round it out. All of that for about $1800 versus $2800 to $3000 for Canon or Nikon systems that would incorporate, say, a Canon 30D or a Nikon D80, and a mix of their respective, better than average lenses. If I could find one of the good Japanese Tamron 17-50 lenses for a 30D body, I might then pony up the bucks for the Canon 70-200 L/F4 IS and also their prime 60mm macro. I could get away with that system for about $2700, but that's still about a grand more than the Olympus entry level system described above. Olympus eventually will come out with an improved model of the E-500--E-410--E510 series, superceding the E-510. I'd keep the E-510 for a second body and pick up the new model for my primary system. Whatever . . . decisions, decisions . . . trade-off after trade-off . . . ouch!! this one is a lemon...anyways i hope it is. Cause i was planning on getting one of those but now my hopes are all turned around, the sample pictures do indeed look rather soft!! :S Page 1 of 1: 1 Add your messageLogin required
Please login here or if you've not registered, you can register here. Registering is safe, quick and free. |
Specifications
Good resolution and control of CA
Distortion at the wide end.