Di II: Lenses are designed for exclusive use on digital cameras with smaller-size imagers and inherit all of the benefits of our Di products. These lenses are not designed for conventional cameras and digital cameras with image sensors larger than 24mm x 16mm.
The SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 is a lightweight, compact, fast standard zoom lens designed exclusively for digital SLR cameras, expanding the product concept of the popular SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 zoom lens.
In addition, portrait shots are made beautiful with the natural out-of-focus effect characteristic provided by the fast F/2.8 aperture. Additionally, a broader photographic expression through the use of faster shutter speeds as a result of the maximum aperture offers enhanced photographic pleasure. The lens boasts one of the best close-up shooting performances in the class of fast standard Zoom lenses designed exclusively for digital cameras and featuring an F/2.8 maximum aperture throughout the entire zoom range, to ensure stress-free photographic shots at all focal lengths and distances.
Replacing you standard zoom with this one will be a great way to get sharper images from a well-built lens.
(more in-depth review coming soon)
Why should you care what I think?
My relationship with this item: I have borrowed a friends Where did you buy this item?: N/A Price paid: 0 When did you buy this item?: N/A
Conclusions at a glance
Would you recommend this Item: Yes Pros: Good build, affordable fast zoom (f/2.8) Cons: Not consistent across the range
User Lens Reviews
Average user rating from: 139 user(s)
Overall rating (weighted)
4.1
Sharpness
4.2
Build Quality
4.1
AF Speed
4.1
Value for Money
4.2
Add new review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
King of Wide Angle Stuff, Friday, 27 August 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
3.3
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
4.0
I bought this lens for my 7D as a replacement for my stock lens from a previous camera.
I primarily shoot wide angle to mid-zoom for portraits. But I find myself shooting events on occasion that requires a little more reach. The 50mm end of this lens doesnt really cut it. Its by no means the fault of the camera.
The 17mm end is, in my opinion, the strong point of the lens. When the focus is set to the closest focusing range and bring the camera close, the background distortion and bokeh are magnificent. I find myself doing portraits in that manner because of what it does to the background.
The 50mm end? Not so much. I have done some tests with my 50mm 1.8, and I have a sneaking suspicion that this lens' 50mm isnt a true 50mm as it look less zoomed-in than my 1.8.
Overall, I like this lens. I dont want to list a bunch of technical stuff about it. Just my impressions working with it for several good months with it. And my impressions are good. I feel its "adequate" as it doesnt include "everything", but no lens worth its money can do that. So, I like it, but one should really consider several lenses in the chance you find yourself needing more reach.
This lens makes its presence known! (Both performa, Wednesday, 18 August 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
4.5
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
Though this is my first lens I have done a lot of research on which to get. It makes me knowledgeable about the lens. I have owned it for about 3 weeks now. I shoot with a Canon 40D. I can say that this lens is excellent for its price. It's constant F2.8 aperture makes it so that you can still do zoom adjustments after focusing, making this lens very fast to work with. Depth of field range is excellent. F 8.0 seems to have the best balance. The build is pretty solid as well, no rattling components, no loose ends. However my only complaint with it is the auto focus motor. It is very loud, Think of a small hand drill. They made no attempt to dampen the noise either, though I suppose it cuts the price down to make it competitive. Just don't go around trying to shoot wild life with this. It scares the bejesus out of everything.
Note a few important things before buying this lens:
It is a crop body lens, this means you can't use it on any version of the 5D or 1D without Vignetting.
There is a VC (Vibration Compensation) and non-VC model. In my opinion you do not to control shake in the 17-50 range, save money and go with non-VC. (this page is non-VC)
Very nice night lens, while you aren't going to expose the Milky Way, at F 2.8 you get a very good low light setup.
Really, the autofocus motor is loud, the loudest I've heard on a lens yet, keep it in consideration if you shoot nature.
I can answer any other questions if you email me at rcman50166 at yahoo dot com.
Very good..."Great too often overused", Thursday, 22 July 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
4.3
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
5.0
I had this little gem for about a year when I still shot APC size DSLRs. Since the switch to FF, I may have to pick up a 28-75.
This Tammy was the most used lens on my 40d. I had the venerable 28-135IS, Canon 70-300 IS, Canon 10-22, 100mm/2.8 (non-IS), and days before I sold the 40d--a 35/1.4L and 17-40L. As widely known, the buzzing autofocus noise is dreadful!! Believe the hype. But otherwise I loved this baby. And the images rock!! It is an extremely sharp lens from 4.0-11.00. At 2.8--meh! Ok, usable but certainly not world-class. If I had to pick between this and the 28-135IS, I would go for the Canon. But I needed 2.8 more than image quality (only to realize that FF high-ISO was what I needed all along.)
For the price, especially used, well worth it. However, again the 28-135 IS is a killer lens with a circular polarizer. It's as good a walk-around lens that someone would ever need, if just amateur pics. Add the IS and 135mm length, great stuff for under $400.
Enough with the Canon. I only mention because we are talking el-cheapo lenses here. This Tamron has some distortion at 17mm, gone by 18 and 50mm not the best quality. 35-40mm shots were very, very good. And to the naked eye, not much different than my 17-40L at 4.0. I would know, I set up the tripod and compared them many, many times. The 17-40L has unreal color and saturation. But sharpness is not its strong point.
The moral--every lenses as its strengths and weaknesses. Test them out, research them, and decide what will fit your shooting needs. Once you do, the equipment is negligible to your photos. The best image quality comes from knowing your equipments limitations. And a 50.00 dollar tripod does amazing things
I was looking for an affordable lens to take on vacation with me and this one performed great. The large aperture is great for shooting in low light at all focal lengths (not quite like my 50mm/1.8, but I enjoy being able to zoom). Part of me wishes I had Bit the bullet and gotten the new one with IS, but I got some really nice shots with this lens. I'm going to get rid of my kit lens because this one is SO much better. Totally worthwhile purchase!
GREAT lens. Excellent replacement for Kit lenses., Saturday, 29 May 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
3.8
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
5.0
I bought this to replace my 18-55mm kit lens that came with my Rebel. Since then this thing has seen a lot of action and the kit lens collected dust in the closet. This lens is really spectacular in sharpness and color. It rivals some much more expensive zooms. The constant 2.8 aperature is a huge improvement over the kit lens too. I would recommend this lens to any serious or amateur photographer.
It's also lightweight which is nice for a walk-around lens. the only down-side is that the AF is somewhat loud (compared to Canon), but still acceptable.
Very good but you get what you pay for, Monday, 17 May 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
4.0
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
3.0
I did a lot of research and ended up buying this choosing this over what I really wanted the Canon USM mainly over price. The bokeh is good and the tamron does take sharp pictures but I am going to sell this one on Amazon to go get the Canon. I really want the USM and "optical excellence" that some online experts said the Canon has. I guess you get what you pay for.
Awesome Lens, great price, better than the kit len, Thursday, 29 April 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
I have been using this lens for about a month now. It is a really good lens and provides me with enough quality to get great shots in low light situations. It is fast, highly durable, I just wish it was a little longer.
Good lens, great construction, it's just not Canon, Monday, 29 March 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
3.3
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
4.0
You get what you pay for and I should have waited and saved my pennies to get Canon glass. Tamron does make good lenses but the focus is slow, noisy and just does not compare to a L series Canon lens. You do get what you pay for in my opinion. I will be purchasing the wide angle Canon lens in the future and attempting to resell this on Amazon for someone who may want not need what I need in pictures. I just prefer Canon lenses. Sorry Tamron. Shipping was quick, product was as advertised and everything else about the lens is as advertise. It is just my personal preference.
This is a great lens, especially for the cost with only a few minor drawbacks. 1.It's a noisy lens, which I knew going in to it and it doesn't bother me, but people who are shooting weddings should know this. It is loud enough to be disruptive in a ceremony. :) 2.the zoom is backwards from canon, which again isn't a big deal, but it drives my husband crazy. 3.the zoom in and out isn't quite as smooth as I had hoped, which is it's biggest drawback for me, but still not a big deal. Overall, I like the quality of it. You can't go wrong with the price for the quality. It is not the caliber that you find in the canon version of this, but it's also not the price either. I'm impressed for the cost, and having played with it for a couple months now, would purchase again knowing what I know about it. :) It's very nice that it comes with a "flower" lens hood, standard... and there is a rebate going for it right now for students for 85.00!!! They have GREAT customer service, and are a pleasure to deal with. Just a little slap towards amazon and the nearly 3 weeks it took to get to me, but that has nothing to do with the lens its self.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
