Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 upgrade opinions

simoran1 said:
These were both taken at 2.8?

I ask as it appears that the whole scene is pretty sharp, which I though a higher f number would have produced (bear with me I'm new to this photography stuff)

Great pick by the way, really need to get one of these lenses!
Click to expand...

Yes both taken at 2.8, and yes you are correct, it gives a much shallower depth of field. I have focused on both images about half way into the ruins to get as much sharpness as possible in the main area, there has also being a bit of PP sharpening in Lightroom, not much though.

Yea Neil I had read that the quality control was poor but I made sure that I could send the lens back for a replacement before hand if it was soft. Turns out I didn't need to :)
 
Neil79 said:
Wow your tamron looks well nice!

Mine was an utter piece of ********, not just that I had to return it and it took 3+ months to get my money back :(

Never touching that lens again
Click to expand...

I have a feeling you went bargain hunting and found a really dud website selling returned stock
 
ishamy said:
Yes both taken at 2.8, and yes you are correct, it gives a much shallower depth of field. I have focused on both images about half way into the ruins to get as much sharpness as possible in the main area, there has also being a bit of PP sharpening in Lightroom, not much though.

Yea Neil I had read that the quality control was poor but I made sure that I could send the lens back for a replacement before hand if it was soft. Turns out I didn't need to :)
Click to expand...


Do you miss the lack of vc? Struggling to decide to go with the vc or non vc version
 
Well I just went ahead and ordered one of these, can't wait to get my hands on it. Will post some test pictures when I receive it
 
Well the lens arrived yesterday, not had chance to get out and about with it yet but I took a quick test shot using the kit lens as a subject.

Nothing done with this file, straight off the camera and converted to jpeg.


IMG_4227 by moran.simon, on Flickr

Seems very sharp at both 2.8 and stopped down to 4.5 (which is what this photo is). I took the same photo using the 50mm 1.8 and the Tamron seems sharper. The bokeh also seems a lot smoother than the 50mm.

I went for the non vc version and so far in indoor lighting, the lack of stabilization hasn't really caused a problem (although note the above picture was taken using a Gorillapod)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom