 Best wide angle zoom lens. |
| Review Date: July 20, 2006 |
| Reviewer: Linan Chen, Chicago, USA |
I tested canon 28-105 3.5-4.5, sigma 24-70 2.8, canon 50mm 1.8, canon 18-55 3.5-5.6. I would say this Tamron 17-50 2.8 is my dream lens. I bought canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 for the focal range but was very sad about its softness and returned it. Then I went to sigma. That's a huge, heavy lens and very solid. Based on reviews, it should be very sharp. however, it was not true in my case. No matter how hard I tried, I never got sharp image. I guess I was not lucky enough to have a good copy and returned it in one week. Finally I bought Tamron 17-50mm 2.8. It surprised me from the very first picture. The sharpness is as good as canon 50mm 1.8 prime, the benchmark. Contrast is very good and color too. 7 blade aperture makes very nice blur background. I care so much about sharpness so the lens is my taste. The focusing is very accurate and fast enough, even though not as fast as sigma. Now I never touch canon 18-55 kit lens, the difference is huge. It's true this lens has no IS. But for 17-50mm range, IS is not as useful as for tele lens. The price is excellent considering the top optical quanlity. Now I am feeling I am a pro. :)))
The reasons I choose this lens are:
1. widest angle in the class(most important thing for 1.6X cropping factor sensor camera
2. Very sharp and top quanlity glass
3. light weighted and small and easy to carry
4. 7-blade aperture makes nice background(if you own canon 50mm 1.8 II, you will see its 5-blade aperture makes harsh background)
5. big constant 2.8 aperture through the whole range
6. excellent price |
Talk about bang for your buck!
|
| Review Date: October 9, 2006 |
| Reviewer: Leetsauce, San Jose, California |
This is the kind of lens that makes me wish Canon would understand their market better. Instead of putting out a 17-55mm zoom that everyone can afford, they put out a EF-S non pro lens at a pro price, which has serious quality control issues. Tamron, however, responded.
This lens is quite sharp. It could definately be used for professional purposes. Sharp at 2.8 and much sharper above. After using this lens, the 17-40mm L, as well as the new EF-S 17-55mm, I can honestly say that Tamron beat out Canon in their own game in terms of quality for the money. Great optics, great range, affordable, and a SIX YEAR warranty, as opposed to Canon's weak 1 year warranty. Buy me. |
How does it rate? More importantly how does it rank?
|
| Review Date: July 9, 2006 |
| Reviewer: Abdulrahman Aljabri, Jeddah |
Update: I really think this lens is a godsend to the enthusiast, it performs well and is very light and compact. Carrying this lens for hours compared to the more professional and better built, but heavier, Canon Lenses makes it worthwhile to use especially if you consider the saving you get with this lens.
This lens is probably the most interesting among all the wide angel lenses available to Canon crop DSLR users. It offers the best of everything except for a couple of things here and there. Best of all it's price beats all other lenses in that range. But before I start comparing it to other options here is a basic rating of this lens.
RATING: The lens is well built and surprisingly light and compact. It doesn't have the solid L feel but still has a firm feeling that inspires confidence while shooting. Sharpness is at par with other top quality zooms, so much so that at F8.0 and above it matches many primes. Distortion like chromatic aberration and vignetting are about average. Meaning you would probably have to stop the lens down to 5.6-8.0 to eliminate distortions. Focus is quick and right on though a little noisy. Overall, a very good lens.
RANKING: With all of the above in perspective how does it rank? Compared to Canon's 17-40L 4.0 I think the Tamron come on top. Here is a breakdown of the Tamron strenghts and weaknesses compared to the Canon 17-40L.
Strengths
1. Faster lens (2.8 vs 4.0). That can make the difference between taking the shot or missing in a low light situation.
2. It has a wider zoom range (10mm at the telephoto end).
Weaknesses
1. Flare and chromatic aberration control lags behind the 17-40L.
2. solid build but not as solid as the tank-like 17-40L. Some may find that slightly objectionable after using any L lens for many years. |
Best value in the class
|
| Review Date: January 25, 2007 |
| Reviewer: Wei Wu, NYC |
This is my first non-Canon lens purchase, and I'm extremely happy with my decision.
After lots of researches, online reviews, and the test drive at the NY PhotoPlus EXPO last year, I know this is the best walk around lens for my XT. The image is sharp even at the borders, and the color is beautiful. I would say the image quality looks the same as the result from my friend's Canon 17-40L. I'm confident to use any F stops at any zoom range while shooting.
The only complain is the auto focus noise, since it does not come with an ultrasonic motor. But the noise level is acceptable, better than the Canon 50mm f1.8 II, and most likely only happens in low light situation. The focus is fast even though without the USM, anyway.
It comes with a lens hood and Tamron USA 6 year warranty, which is something Canon should be improved.
Base on my research and test drive, only one lens in the same range out perform this Tamron 17-50 f2.8. It is the Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8 USM IS. However, this new Canon lens cost more than thousand dollars, which is not something I can justify.
This lens has won the 2006/2007 EISA best consumer lens award. If you need a lens with first-class image quality, excellent performance, reasonable price, and best warranty, go for it.
|
Excellent picture quality, decent price, right size ...
|
| Review Date: September 17, 2006 |
| Reviewer: Stan Targowski, Buffalo Grove, IL USA |
I am a photography hobbyist, and just started building my gear portfolio for Canon DSLR [EOS 30D] - having switched from KonicaMinolta gear. One of my first objectives was to find a lens that will cover day-to-day photography...
- The lens had to be bright (f4.0 or better)
- It had to be wide angle (28mm equivalent on 35mm or better)
- I was looking for something broader than KM 17-35 I was used to.
- The lens had to provide great quality pictures.
- The lens and the camera had to be of a manageable size
My first choice was to look at Canon 17-40mm/f4.0 L, or Canon 17-55/2.8 ... The first one was huge, and the light of 4.0 was not that impressive. The second one, at $1,200 was a very expensive non 'L' lens. At this point, I also realized that I was not a professional photographer, and would not be able to haul around either of these heavy lenses - same for 16-35mm/2.8 `L'.
The second step was to look at Sigma and Tamron. It was a toss up between Sigma 18-50mm/2.8 EX, and Tamron SP 17-50mm/2.8. I made the decision to go with Tamron.
It fits all my criteria above. It is relatively small, so I keep it on my camera most of the time. It is very bright, f2.8, and produces great results. It works very well in combination with the EOS30D and the 580EX flash.
I was surprised to see the lens was assembled in China, but the build quality seems very solid.
I have taken a lot of pictures at all ends of the spectrum and do not see any negative artifacts, when viewing at 1600x1200 on a 20" monitor, or blowing up to 8x10 or 20x30.
The other lenses I have are Canon EF 85mm/f1.8 for portraits, and Canon EF 70-200mm/f2.8 IS - the latter, I still try to find a good use for - it is a phenomenal quality lens, but it is just huge.
|
|
No video reviews found for this product.
