Tamron 17-50 F2.8 IF non-VC. any owner?

[ghache]

Have a few question for whoever owns this lens

I had my ps3 and a few games for sale for a few weeks and couldnt sell the damn thing.

I offerered this guy a trade on a Tamron 17-50 F2.8 IF non-VC for DX. (suposed to be sharper) and he accepted. Since the lens still sells for 520 $ with taxe his asking price was 350.

Hes not using the lens anymore since he bought a d3.

I tested the lens yesterday and i was quite impressed with it. since its 2.8, light and kinda small for a 2.8 lens, I could keep it as a backup lens and use it as a "party lens"
Lens is near brand new, about a year old. no sratch, aperture seems to work pretty good.

I took a few test shot to check the auto focus and it was kinda noisy but it never missed.... I read on review that its "normal". Is it?

I took a few shot at 17mm and 50mm wide open to see what it was all about and suprisingly barrel distortion/vigneting at 17mm was not that bad and sharpness/contrast was REALLY good.

for anyone who owns this lens and used it alot, Am i trowing away my ps3 for a crappy plastic lens or is it worth it? condisering i am barely using the ps3 ?

reviews are kinda mixed.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Here are sample pics you can inspect: Full-size sample photos from Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8

 

[Dao]

I bought mine couple years ago used for $300. And I saw a few listings in the past year asking for $350.

So if you PS3 with games worth $350, I will say it is fair trade (Sorry, I do not own PS3 so I really not sure how much they worth). Plus, you maybe able to sell it back for $350 later on.

As for the lens itself (I have the Canon version), I like it and it is my main lens. AF speed is not great, but not bad either. AF noise is a little on the loud side, but in general, nobody will notice. (except if you are inside a quiet room)

As for the optical performance, it is quit good especially for the price.

Couple pics taken with that lens.

 

[ghache]

Look good to me, i've checked alot of the picture that was posted on the site 2wheelphoto posted and its seems like a good lens overall,

 

[usayit]

Why would you assume its a crappy plastic lens? Is it just because its not a Nikkor nor Canon?

The 17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron is a very popular high speed zoom among the Pentaxians.

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR LD ASPHERICAL (IF) Lens Reviews - Zoom Lenses - Pentax Third-Party Lens Review Database

It also has been reviewed on a few camera bodies at this site: All Tests / Reviews



PS> I'm in the used market for one in pentax KAF mount....

 

[ghache]

Why would you assume its a crappy plastic lens? Is it just because its not a Nikkor nor Canon?

The 17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron is a very popular high speed zoom among the Pentaxians.

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR LD ASPHERICAL (IF) Lens Reviews - Zoom Lenses - Pentax Third-Party Lens Review Database

It also has been reviewed on a few camera bodies at this site: All Tests / Reviews



PS> I'm in the used market for one in pentax KAF mount....

I am not assuming its a crappy plastic lens because its a 3rd party lens....
It just felt "cheap" at first. its all plastic but i dont care. Zoom ring felt solid and smooth, nice hood. If quality is good, image is sharps, im all over it lol
i own a sigma lens and a love it.

 

[bazooka]

I have a Canon mount and it is also one of my most used lenses. The AF is a bit noisy compared to my USM lenses and it doesn't have FTM, but that doesn't bother me so much. It's a relatively sharp lens.

 

[Big Mike]

I also own this lens and use it as my main 'normal length' zoom. I agree with all the reviews above, the focus isn't a quite or as fast as USM, but the image quality is pretty darn good.

The only thing about this lens, is that somewhere along the line, I lost the front....I guess it's a face plate. The ring around the front element that shows the name/size etc. One day I just noticed that it was gone.

 

[Drake]

I am not an owner of this lens, but I know it's a great performer, especially when you remember how cheap it is. You'd really have to spend 3 times as more to get something better. I am actually thinking of getting it myself.

 

[Renol]

My fiancee recently picked up that lens and I've had the opportunity to try it out. I'm rather impressed with the quality of it and the sharpness of the shots produced. I can't say one way or the other on the AF but I'm glad she got it...especially since I can use it!

 

[djacobox372]

It's a GREAT lens. Probably the best dollar value out there in the normal zoom range.

VC isn't really useful below 50mm, unless you shoot a lot of video, and I've heard that the non-vc versions of this lens perform slightly better then the newer VC models.

 

[orb9220]

Yep picked mine up used for $360 used over 2 yrs ago and still running like a champ. And yep a tad noisy and slow'ish AF but a great performer and wouldn't worry about it and enjoy it!


Purple Wet Series 3 by Orbmiser, on Flickr


Open for Knowledge by Orbmiser, on Flickr


Lightrail Wait by Orbmiser, on Flickr

And this lens gets you Out! which the PS3 fails to do!
.

 

[pez]

I have this lens in K mount and LOVE it. Sharp wide open at any focal length, and really sharp a stop or two down. Great walk around lens! Here's one wide open @ 50mm (K-5):

 

[ghache]

Ok so i finally got the lens but it was already dark outside so i took a few shots in the kitchen just for the hell of it.
These are some nasty banana for my banana bread




Camera Nikon D7000 Exposure 0.04 sec (1/25) Aperture f/2.8 Focal Length 46 mm ISO Speed 3200



Also i nice example of what the D7000 iso performance is all about, this is straight out of the camera with no post processing except white balance

 

[orb9220]

Nice Shot and Hope you are Happy with it. But even the D90 doesn't do bad at 3200 with this lens.
D90 - Tamron 17-50 f2.8 handheld. Shot Raw at ISO 3200 test shot zero noise processing.
Lightroom adjusted levels and sharpen. No post NR.


Heading Home by Orbmiser, on Flickr
.