| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/09/2007 05:43:08 PM · #1 |
| Looking at these three lenses, just wondering what experience anyone has on any of these. They all seem like good, fast lenses. Any thoughts? Thanks. |
|
|
|
12/09/2007 06:07:13 PM · #2 |
I just bought the Tamron 17-50 for my Canon 10d. After comparing to Tokina 16-50, Sigma 18-50 and Canon 17-40... I concluded that it was the best choice. I haven't tried it in the field yet but out of what I have read, I shouldn't be disappointed.
*edit :my choice was influenced by the fact that I most likely will not eventualy go to a full frame camera(such as 5d, 1D etc.). I'm not sure how Nikon compares to Canon in that department.
Message edited by author 2007-12-09 18:17:27. |
|
|
|
12/09/2007 06:11:57 PM · #3 |
I have the sigma 18-50 EX and it is pretty good, I use it as my general purpose lens. It hasn't let me down yet.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2007 08:43:17 PM · #4 |
I had the first sigma 18-50 2.8 EX (non-macro). It's NOT sharp wide open, not acceptable sharp till F 3.5 or 4.
I have not tried the newer version.
I hear the tamron is sharp. However, based on my other tamron lenses the color may not match Canon lenses and the focus speed is well below that of a USM equipped lens. Canon has their 18-55 IS for about the same price - I hear good things about it, although it's not a constant 2.8.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2007 11:37:41 PM · #5 |
SLR Gear is a very good website that (among other things) tests lens quality. For many lenses, they have an interactive graph which shows sharpness over the lens frame and how it changes as you change aperture (and focal length in a zoom).
I used this recently to pick a new lens. I went into the process with a specific Tamron lens in mind, determined it would not be sharp enough for my needs, and found a better one using their slider thingy.
They haven't tested every lens from every manufacturer, but if they have tested a lens you're interested in, it gives very good insight into that lens's quality.
Recommended. |
|
|
|
12/09/2007 11:57:24 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
SLR Gear is a very good website that (among other things) tests lens quality. For many lenses, they have an interactive graph which shows sharpness over the lens frame and how it changes as you change aperture (and focal length in a zoom).
I used this recently to pick a new lens. I went into the process with a specific Tamron lens in mind, determined it would not be sharp enough for my needs, and found a better one using their slider thingy.
They haven't tested every lens from every manufacturer, but if they have tested a lens you're interested in, it gives very good insight into that lens's quality.
Recommended. |
Thanks! I've been looking for a review site like that. |
|
|
|
12/10/2007 12:19:23 AM · #7 |
| Thanks for the input guys |
|
|
|
12/10/2007 08:34:43 AM · #8 |
I just ordered the Tamron 17 - 50 from here thought this was a great price and free standard delivery.
Used this reveiw site to compare against various lenses and read the reviews from here
Hope this helps mine not arrived as yet :-( but should be with me in a day or three :-)
Lee |
|
|
|
12/10/2007 09:01:09 AM · #9 |
I have the tamron. It seriously kicks ass. Sharp, fast, great colours (I think) and nice contrast at around F4 or so. wide open it isn't terrible and very very usable, but it comes into it's own at around F4.5.
I was torn between this and the 17-40mm L but went for this because it's better in every department except build quality. |
|
|
|
12/10/2007 09:41:25 AM · #10 |
| Yep, I have the Tamron and love it. Build quality may not be canon L quality but is still very sturdy. Nice and sharp, very usable at f/2.8 - only downside is that the focus motor is rather noisy, but it doesn't bother me at all. |
|
|
|
12/10/2007 10:00:22 AM · #11 |
| I have the sigma18-50mm f2.8. Its pretty sharp and i have'nt noticed any softness at the edges. I wish i got the newer macro version, but for $300 brand new I'll live with it. |
|
|
|
07/28/2009 10:56:37 PM · #12 |
| The Tamron 17-50 f2.8 has horrible distortion along horizontals. Try shooting a horizon and it turns into a slippery dip. |
|
|
|
07/29/2009 02:55:32 AM · #13 |
I've been looking for one of these three lenses on the FM Buy/Sell forums. I've gotten a lot of responses so far, and let me just tell you: The Tokina is SHARP. Very sharp. One person selling his forwarded me several full res samples from it, and the degree of detail that it captured literally astounded me. And the other two lenses are no slouch either.
I ended up getting a SWEEEEET deal on a Nikkor 17-55, so I am going that route instead. The other thing to consider is that the Tokina has more CA than the others; however, I did not notice it being a problem in the samples and most software can correct CA to a degree anyways. Had I not come across the Nikkor I'd have jumped on the Tokina. |
|
|
|
07/29/2009 05:54:59 AM · #14 |
You should also take a look at the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro, outstanding lens for the money.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/19/2024 10:50:09 PM EST.
