Tamron 17-35mm

sloth

sloth

sloth

Associate
Joined
20 Apr 2003
Posts
947
Just wondering if anyone has had any personal experience of the Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4?

Any opinions on the lens would be great, especially regarding build quality, sharpness, colours, autofocus speed etc. Alternatively, recommend me an alternative wide zoom. It'll be used as a standard walkabout lens on a 350D.

Thanks. :)
 
I have this lens, and I think it performs fairly well for my needs. I've noticed that it's quite a 'bright' lens meaning the colours aren't as saturated as you might get with the equivalent canon offering, this can be fixed in psot processing however. The focus ring moves during AF meaning you have to keep your finger clear (I don't find this a problem) and the build isn't as good as the 17-40L.
Having said that, I seem to have quite a good copy, I get fairly good contrast & sharpness out of it, and I don't regret buying it.

Here are some rough (full size) samples (56K no)

http://www.twobeds.com/upload/userfiles/sleepyd/CRW_2554.jpg
http://www.twobeds.com/upload/userfiles/sleepyd/CRW_2335.jpg
http://www.twobeds.com/upload/userfiles/sleepyd/CRW_3517.jpg

Hope that's useful.
 
There is also a second listing for this lens (or a newer version):

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=245&sort=7&cat=43&page=1

This seems to get better reviews although I am not quite sure whether it is the same lens as previously mentioned or a newer, revised version. The model number is SP AF 17-35 as opposed to just AF 17-35.

I am also interested in this lens as an alternative to the Canon 17-40L.
 
It's a great little lens, lightweight and very sharp. In pure optics comparison, it will do very well (match) the Canon 17-40mm L. It will lose out in areas like build quality, focus speed, focus sound, and lack of full-time manual focussing override.

I love the lens, one of my favourite in my bag. At f/8 it's very sharp.
 
Just bought it

I have just got this lens but haven't taken many pics yet.

I thought it was a more sensible (I ain't made of money so Canon 17-40L is silly) choice and of good enough quality for my needs.

Will post pics soon.
 
Last edited:
fearby said:
I have just got this lens but haven't taken many pics yet.

I thought it was a more sensible (I ain't made of money so Canon 17-40L is silly) choice and of good enough quality for my needs.

Will post pics soon.
Click to expand...

Don't feel as if you have sacrificed quality by choosing this lens over the Canon L lens - you haven't.

You HAVE sacrificed build quality, and focus speed etc...but not image quality. The Tamron is fantastic.
 
Thanks for the replies everyone, very helpful. I've read a few reviews and user comments, and it really does look great for the money. :)

I'd love to see some more samples taken with it, especially wide open.
 
sloth said:
Thanks for the replies everyone, very helpful. I've read a few reviews and user comments, and it really does look great for the money. :)

I'd love to see some more samples taken with it, especially wide open.
Click to expand...

I'll see what I can do ;)
 
Sleepyd said:
I'll see what I can do ;)
Click to expand...

I have samples, but none wide open, I don't tend to use it in places where I need f/2.8 or f/4. I do have this test chart (for sharpness) :

Tamron_test.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom