Tamron 17-50 advice

[PushingTin]

Looking for a zoom in the 17-70 region.

I have the Nikon 70-200 VR so I am very spoilt when it comes to image quality. Now that I have experienced just how good the 70-200 is, I want the same IQ in the 17-70 range.

I have had the 18-200 VR and was dissapointed with the IQ from that lens.

I have heard really good reviews on the Tamron 17-50, is the Nikon 17-55 a better bet or is the Tamron really as good as the reviews make it out to be.

I am not so worried about build (i know the nikon is better there) but Image Quality is very important to me.

Obviously cost is a factor....

Currently using a D50 but my D200 is on the way

All help and comments are welcomed and appreciated - Thanks.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

If you don't care about build, than get the tamron, because that's why you buy the Nikkor.

I owned a Tamron 11-18 for 2 days and returned it because it had the worst build quality of anything i've ever used. It was BAD.

 

[Big Mike]

I've got the Tamron 17-50 F2.8. It's a very good lens. Build quality is good and the image quality is also very good. I don't think the IQ is quite as good as the Canon equivalent (17-55 F2.8 IS) but it's less than half the price, which is why I got it.

I'm not too familiar with the IQ of the Nikon 17-55 F2.8...but I hear it's pretty darn good. I guess the question to ask yourself, is whether or not that extra 5 or 10% of IQ is worth double or triple the price.

 

[S2K1]

I love my Tamron 17-50. I was skeptical but after reading the reviews, I went for it. Everyone one of my friends who have borrowed this lens from me has been blown away by the quality compared to cost.

 

[Deadeye008]

I have had my Tamron 17-50 for about 6 months now and it is my most used lens. IQ is very good, even wide open at 2.8. I have not been able to test it against the nikon or canon equivalent. I have the canon 70-200 4L and can say that with both lenses stopped down to f4 there is little difference in IQ with a slight edge going to the canon. Build quality on the Tamron is not as good as th canon L series but it is still very good compared to canon's standard series lenses.

 

[PushingTin]

Thx for all the comments

 

[PushingTin]

Just purchased the Tamron 17-50 2.8

Havent played too much with it yet, but first impressions are not bad. The build is better than I expected (after hearing terrible reviews on the build) and IQ looks ok - but still need to test properly.

Oh and I made sure it was "Made in Japan", also heard there were a few issues with the "Made in China" versions!

 

[BrandonS]

I got the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. I've only owned my D80 and the lens for a few days now, but it takes great picture thus far. The only thing I've noticed is at 2.8 it has some vignetting, but nothing I haven't been able to easily remove with Lightroom.

 

[JerryPH]

Just purchased the Tamron 17-50 2.8

Havent played too much with it yet, but first impressions are not bad. The build is better than I expected (after hearing terrible reviews on the build) and IQ looks ok - but still need to test properly.

Some have the front element come loose over time. You need a tiny screwdriver, remove the front glass, tighten down the 3 screws after dipping in locktite and never worry again.

Though the Tamron is known for being sharp... the Sigma 18-50 DC EX HSM macro is sharper, has lower CA, less vignetting and less flare issues... it also comes with a 3:1 macro... something none of the competitors have... all for about the same price.