| Review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

I'm not a Tamron fan but this lens is changing my , Tuesday, 23 February 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		5.0
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

This is not my first Tamron lens, I've had others that I've returned or re-sold after using for a while. Needless to say I'm not much of a fan. I don't know what prompted me to try them again, but I'm glad I did. I was previously using a Sigma 28-70 on an APS-C sensor dSLR. For routine shooting of family events, the Sigma was a bit too long of a focal length. I purchased this after considering other lenses made by Canon, Sigma, and Tokina. I read up on users' opinions of the lenses and decided that the Tamron was so widely loved and seemed to be such good value for the money, I'd give them one last shot.

The lens is now the one I shoot with for just about everything. I have an ultra-wide, a macro, and a tele with IS. I use each of those ones about 5% each, and this one about 85% of the time.

Why did this one change my mind?

The build quality is very good. The image quality is outstanding, with very crisp images even at f/2.8. Bokeh is lovely. It's perfect for travel if you can only take one lens. Its perfect for snaps of family indoors or out since the aperture is f/2.8 throughout the whole zoom range. Unlike the Tamron lenses like their 28-300 (for example), this lens isn't soft and doesn't have a beige cast to the photos, its contrasty and has good color rendition.

Nice job Tamron!

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

I'd give it 4.5 stars if I could..., Sunday, 14 February 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		4.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

I'm not sure I can add much to the very comprehensive reviews already submitted for this lens. Because there is already so much written about this lens, I'll try to keep this brief. By and large, I agree with others: this is a solidly built lens, it covers a very convenient "walk-around" focal range for a 1.6x APS-C DSLR, it has most of the features I was looking for, and it has very good optics.

Like many others, I was unwilling to shell out the dough for the comparable Canon model (17-55 IS), which would have cost me about two-and-a-half times more money. I also decided not to pay extra for the Vibration Controlled (VC) model, based on reports that the optical quality of the VC version was inferior. I opted for better sharpness and a lower price-point over the extra 3-stops or so of hand-held shooting that the VC offers (plus, I've heard that the VC is a bit loud in operation, but I've not tried one).

I've had the lens for only a few days, but my initial impressions are very positive. I did a quick comparison between this lens (at 50mm) and the Canon 50mm f/1.8. Wide open, the prime lens was much sharper in the corners, but the Tamron held its own in center sharpness. When the Canon was stopped-down to 2.8 (to equal the Tamron wide-open), the disparity was much more glaring; the Tamron wide-open at 50mm just cannot compete with the sharpness of the prime at f/2.8. But I think the Tamron's corner sharpness tends to fall off as you move outward in the zoom range, so corner softness seems less of an issue at the wider focal lengths. Stopped down to f/4, the Tamron starts closing the gap, and by f/5.6 or so, I would say the advantage is negligible (though still noticeable if viewed at 100%). My conclusion from this unscientific comparison? This Tamron is excellent glass. For an inexpensive zoom to compete with (even if not surpassing) the sharpness of a notoriously sharp prime lens is impressive (the 50mm 1.8 is pretty sharp, and it is exceptionally so for its price). Yes, corner sharpness lags a bit, but that is to be expected from a zoom that isn't priced at four digits or above. All things considered, including price, this lens performs very well in the area of sharpness, in my opinion. One other note about this comparison: the Tamron at 50mm was slightly wider than the Canon 50mm. This is neither good nor bad, just noteworthy.

Some other notes: build quality is sturdy. The lens mount is metal, and the barrel is plastic, but the plastic could be mistaken for metal. The lens does not feel cheap or chintzy--you can tell there is plenty of glass in there--but it is reasonably light-weight. It zooms fluidly but not sloppily: there is a good level of resistance in the zoom ring. I was pleasantly surprised with the focusing speed--pretty quick--and accuracy seems very good, too. But, focusing is a bit noisy, with a high-pitch buzz coming from the motor. Definitely not on par, sound wise, with the USM lens I replaced with this (but probably not quite as loud as the Canon 50mm f/1.8). Not a big deal for me, but if you wanted to shoot events with this lens (such as weddings), the focus motor will make it harder to remain inconspicuous.

Some other very minor nits: There is no full-time manual focus, and the focus ring turns during auto-focusing. This is not really a big deal, but I have to be careful not to interfere with the focus ring with my support hand during shooting. The lens is fairly compact, so if you have big hands you may need to train yourself to stay off the focus ring. I really with it featured full-time manual focusing. Also, while the lens is quite compact, it does grow 30-40% or so as it zooms out. There is a zoom lock switch to lock the lens at 17mm during storage. The included hood is a nice touch, but feels a bit cheap.

All in all, bravo to Tamron. I don't think this is a perfect lens (hence the 4.5 stars), but it is a very practical lens. For its price and its type, it is very sharp. I can't fault it for the lack of full-time manual focusing, because I knew it lacked that feature when I bought it. This lens is a fantastic and inexpensive alternative is the DSLR "walk-around" zoom class.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

expectations?, Wednesday, 20 January 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		5.0
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

Not a big "reviewer", but I have to comment on this piece of equipment. This was my first non-Canon lens purchase. MAN, did I have my expectations "set too low". This is a very high quality lens, every bit as high quality as any Canon lenses I have shot.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

there is a new version of this lens, with VC, Wednesday, 16 December 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.5
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		3.0
Value for Money		5.0

FYI, Tamron has released a new version of this lens, with VC (vibration compensation, aka image stabilization)

This has always been an excellent lens, well regarded by most photographers, so it will be interesting to see how the version with VC does.

See it listed here on Amazon as:
Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 SP XR Di II VC (Vibration Compensation) Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful

Decent lens but some quirks..., Tuesday, 15 December 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.0
Sharpness		3.0
Build Quality		3.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

OK, I wanted a 17-55 mm zoom to complement my Sigma 35-300 zoom for my Canon Rebel XSi. After trying both the Sigma 18-55 mm f2.8 and this lens I chose the Tamron. While it is not quite as sharp as I like (Sigma has soft focus issues too) I could not justify the price of a Canon L series lens. This lens has met my expectations. It is reasonably fast. The autofocus is a bit noisy but not overly so and it allows me to have a lens that is an effective 28-88 mm zoom when factoring in the 1.6 crop factor for the APS-C sensor in the Rebel. There seems to be a bit of distortion when shooting at 17 mm at f2.8 but it is not extreme. Is it as fast and as tack sharp as a Canon L? No, but for the price it is a very good lens. The only complaint that I have with it is that it zooms in the opposite direction from Canon and Sigma lenses. For the price, I am happy and now I have a lens that allows me to shoot in low light without a flash in most conditions.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Very sharp... even wide open. Auto-focus in low-li, Tuesday, 08 December 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.0
Sharpness		4.0
Build Quality		3.0
AF Speed		4.0
Value for Money		5.0

Yesterday, I used this lens for a Christmas in a very low-light restaurant. I'm kinda dissapointed. Missed some good moments because of the slow auto-focus. But the good shoots are extremely SHARP. Loving it! I can`t really manual focus when it`s so dark in the viewfinder... plus my viewfinder is so small (Canon T1i). Great lens for low budget people. Very sharp. For extreme low-light... try another lens (ex. Canon 16-35L -too expensive- or Canon 50 1.4 or 1.8 = fix focal length though =T).

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 1 people found the following review helpful

Sharper than Canon's own 17-40 L, Saturday, 05 December 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

This is a great lens. It delivers the vivid colors and super sharp images all across the focal range. It's light and compact so so you will barely know its there especially if you are use to heaver lenses like Canon 16-40 F/4L, this lens closest rival. This is no "L" lens when it comes to build quality and autofocus speed, but I will give it a slight edge on image sharpness and it is about half the price of Canon's. I would rate the auto focus and build about 7 out of 10. It should stand up to good use over the years as long as nothing to major happens. I would say this lens is definitely the better choice over the Sigma version. Another advantage with the Canon lens besides what I already said is the Canon can be used on full frame cameras, this lens unfortunately can not. So when deciding on which lens to get this will be a area to give some thought. Overall, this lens can not be beat for the price.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

Excellent, Wednesday, 18 November 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.3
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		3.0
Value for Money		5.0

Excellent lenses. Pretty much always mounted on my camera.

Why should you care what I think?

My relationship with this item: I own it

Conclusions at a glance

Would you recommend this Item: Yes
Pros: Light, sharp, good aperture
Cons: noisy AF

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 14 people found the following review helpful

Not the most durable lens., Thursday, 29 October 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		1.0
Sharpness		1.0
Build Quality		1.0
AF Speed		1.0
Value for Money		1.0

Sharp and fast lens but drop it once and it will break. I dropped my and the plastic shattered. I have dropped my Olympus lenses that are also made of plastic more than once but they have never shattered. The only damage is a couple of dents. Impact damage is not covered under Tamron warranty so now I'm out of a very expensive lens. Oh it's also very loud.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

My number one lens, Saturday, 24 October 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		5.0
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

I have used this lens for over 2 years on a Canon XTi and XSi. I have shot 20,000 or more exposures using it for wedding, seniors and family pictures. It is extremely sharp. I do not use the kit lenses which came with the cameras and sold them off right away. I have made 24x30 prints which look wonderful. I had a problem earlier this year with this lens. I was getting an error message. I contacted Tamron, found my old receipt and sent it in. They fixed the lens for free. Tamron lens come with a 6 year warranty which is nice if you use the lens as much as I do. Make sure to hold on to your receipt in case you need a repair.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

2 of 3 people found the following review helpful

My first wide lens, Thursday, 08 October 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.3
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		4.0
Value for Money		4.0

Just got my 17-50 Tamron lens. I cannot beleive how much you can fit on a picture with this lens. I used to own a 28-138 lens and when I took a picture of a tree- I could only get about 1/3 of the tree. With this lens I can get the whole tree and more! Comes with a lens hood which stays on my lens. It does not come with a lens case. The only con of this lens is that the AF motor is a little louder than most. It sounds like a dentist drill.I would definatel recommend this lens over the canon models. Canons costs about $600 more. I have been buying third party lenses lately and have gotten equal results compared to Canon models.
This lens also has an f stop of f/2.8 throughout which makes this a fast lens.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

BEST bang for buck lens EVER, Monday, 28 September 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.5
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		4.0

Simply put the image clarity you get with this lens is amazing. When you factor in that this glass is 50% of the cost of what you need to spend for a similar canon lens (which is NOT an L lens). The Canon 17-55mm sells for over $1k. The L glass 16-35mm sells for $1500. This glass compares to the L glass I own - I own the 24-70mm L and the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L (which is the BEST glass I have ever seen).

The brightness - the ability to shoot in low light and this is a tiny lens compared to my L glass and light. Not light as in cheap - but light as in not heavy like the 24-70mm L. it shoots very sharp - not as sharp as my 70-200 - NOTHING is as good as that. The range is very useful - great for shooting people - works super indoors. I bought and returned a 50mm f1.4 canon prime because I felt this lens performed better than the 50mm prime with the zoom set to 50mm.

IF you wish to buy a first upgraded lens for your camera and you can not afford a 70-200mm f2.8 IS L then buy this lens.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 10 people found the following review helpful

Lens great!, But no lens hood, Wednesday, 23 September 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		2.5
Sharpness		3.0
Build Quality		3.0
AF Speed		1.0
Value for Money		3.0

Product page says that an accessory lens hood was included with purchase. Shipment came in a timely manner but I found no lens hood in the box. I'm too lazy to return so I said f**&k it.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Very Sharp at 17mm. Vivid, saturated colors, Tuesday, 22 September 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

After much wrangling over the 17-55 EF-S and the 17-40 EF L, I pulled the trigger on this lens. Somehow I didn't like the saturated colors of the 17-40 and I couldn't justify 1K on an EF-S but otherwise seemingly , much respected 17-55mm.

Out of the box, I got vivid, but cool colors on my 40D when taken in bright sunlight. I fixed it by using higher Kelvin values.

At 17mm, the lens is extremely sharp. When I get the pictures down to my PC monitor, I am like 'whoa'! The colors are very vivid, bright and saturated (using a slight step up in saturation levels in the 40D).
In low light, I have not missed IS. The 2.8 aperture coupled with the 40D's noise-free to very low noise ISO capabilities, has let me capture blur-free shots (for eg. in the Smithsonian).

The lens gets progressively softer and at 50mm, is very soft. If you are using it as a walk-around, vacation lens, it is satisfactory but definitely nowhere close to ,say, the 50mm f/4.

The build quality seems adequate- solid but not too heavy. The zoom and focus feel right.

The AF does hunt a bit in low light to semi-darkness kind of situation. But again, this can be partially resolved by specifying the focal points in the 40D. But in all fairness, if the light is very low, I'd rather let it hunt to let me know it is unable to focus, than focus on something I didn't want. Again, the 40D has a limiter on how much the AF hunts.

I strongly recommend this as an above-average general purpose lens. Upgrade to specific primes as the need arises.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

BEWARE AMAZON PACKING, Monday, 14 September 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		4.0

I gave the lens a 5 as it meets or exceeds expectation, but I had to add to the numerous complaints on this and other lenses at Amazon about the completely inadequate packaging of lenses.

In looking at lens reviews I saw many complaints about the way these delicate pieces of glass and electronics are packaged by Amazon. I was absolutely amazed when I opened my package to find NO PROTECTIVE PACKING WHATSOEVER IN THE BOX. The lens was left to bounce around inside the amazon box during the shipping. Having paid $20 for shipping, I would expect at least some bubble wrap between the manufacturers box and the outer container. This will be the last piece of camera equipment I buy from Amazon.

There is no excuse for a vendor of this magnitude to be selling fragile electronics and yet not package it correctly. This is not a book. I have entered a packaging complaint and will also be letting Tamron know about this flaw in their supply chain.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review