Photoclubalpha

Recently I discovered www.slrgear.com and its plethora of lens reviews. Naturally, I began to look for my own lenses among them, but found only the Tamron 17-50/2.8 in their list. I decided to compare its sharpness (as tested) to its main competitors and found it quite favorable. To my surprise, however, I found that the 17-50 tested more favorably than the Tamron (KM) 17-35, a lens from which I previously expected better results.

I realize that, despite their similarities in specification, the two lenses were built for very different purposes (one as a super wide-angle zoom for a 35mm film camera, the other as a fast standard zoom for cropped-sensor D-SLRs), but this does not change the fact that they have found a similar utility on APS-C bodies.

I am interested to hear what the users of either (or both) of these lenses think about these findings. Are they consistent with your use and results?

Tamron 17-35/2.8-4
Tamron 17-50/2.8

I used a 17-50 briefly on a Nikon, it seemed good to me, though I was by no means testing it properly..a quick play.

The 17-50 is on paper designed to replace two lenses really (on crop format), the 17-35mm (as you mention..decent enough lens), and the 28-75mm. Esp with the speed f2.8. So if you use those 2 lenses on APS, then this one kinda covers it, bar the 75mm being more tele.

In honesty most folks seem happy enough, I just know the field curvature mention, and the not as sharp corners on the photozone test put some folks off. I would be interested to hear any comment from users with this lens. It certainly seems to be a popular choice, the other being the sigma 17-70, I just hate the feel of sigma lenses, finish wise

I was very happy with my 17-35 (the Tamron version). It took great images with no problems that I could casually see w/ my A200. When looking to finance an 18-250 I noted that from 18-35 it stayed around f/4; I miss that 1mm wide, but I got a fair price for it. Still have the 77mm filters, just in case. I nearly went for the 17-50 instead of 18-250, but no regrets.

I have the Tamron 17-50. I tested a couple of other lenses -- wasn't quite sure what to do to replace the kit lens. Got a 28/f2.8, but that was too limiting. Once I tried the 17-50 at the store, however, I had to have it! I really hadn't heard about it until then, I don't think, but it was clearly faster and sharper than a couple of other lenses I was considering. The main complaint I hear online is that 50mm isn't long enough. I do not regret it, although I do need to swap lenses from time to time. I get such good results from this lens... it's my go-to lens.



Bokeh isn't too bad either, for a zoom.