Tamron 17-50mm .. is it REALLY worth it?

**jackassp** · 08-06-2010, 04:25 PM

Hi.
I have both the Tamron 17-50 and the Pentax DA* 16-50, and both are exceptional, professional standard lenses.

The Pentax lens is silent during focussing, it is weather proof, it is a very solid construction, but it suffers from a little more CA.

The Tamron doesn't feel as solid, there are focussing problems, and it isn't 100% reliable at getting the AF correct, but most of the time it gives excellent images. I got a good one first up, but your mileage may vary...

I would lean towards the Pentax lens.

Cheers, John.

SpecialK · 08-06-2010, 04:59 PM

With a constant f2.8, the Tamron has a 2-stop advantage at the long end. That is worth a lot.

I would buy new to get the warranty, unless used was an incredible deal. Even if "bad" it can be exchanged - unlike used ones.

ohyouloveme · 08-06-2010, 11:29 PM

one simple word - yes.

fractal · 08-07-2010, 12:46 AM

It's a good lens but it's built like shit. I broke the lens mount of mine accidentally. It didn't take much either. In saying that, I don't think i'd be forking out for the DA*16-50. Just have to be careful with it.

I took this street portrait with the Tammy 17-50 & K200D. It is a great walk-around lens. Bokeh is reasonable.

Last edited by fractal; 08-07-2010 at 04:38 AM.

Nightwings · 08-07-2010, 01:28 AM

I appreciate all the comments/advise. I do however have a request.

I have a F 50mm 1.7 prime. It is obviously resolves better than my kit lens. Using the above mentioned prime ... how would the Tammy 17-50 compare to it?

While I'm at it .... are the older M primes sharper than the F series?

Jasvox · 08-07-2010, 01:32 AM

Originally posted by fractal

It's a good lens but it's built like shit. I broke the lens mount of mine accidentally. It didn't take much either. In saying that, I don't think i'd be forking out for the DA*16-50. Just have to be careful with it.

I took with this street portrait with the Tammy 17-50 & K200D. It is a great walk-around lens. Bokeh is reasonable.

Is this HST in this photo?

Jason

Muse · 08-07-2010, 03:19 AM

Originally posted by deadwolfbones

The Tamron focuses quite close, though it doesn't advertise itself as a macro lens. 10in for the Tamron vs. 8in for the Sigma.

For the record, how close does the K-x 18-55mm kit lens focus? I have searched the specs in the manual and couldn't find it.

Also, as long as the question has come up about the F series vs. M series lenses and comparison of the primes with these zooms, may I ask:

How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8?

Last edited by Muse; 08-07-2010 at 03:27 AM.

fractal · 08-07-2010, 04:49 AM

Originally posted by Jasvox

Is this HST in this photo?

Jason

Almost man

Just an eccentric bloke from the street.

Originally posted by Muse

How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8?

It would make sense for them to be identical in IQ.

If I was to do it again, i'd probably go the Sigma 18-50/2.8 for the close focus.

jimr-pdx · 08-07-2010, 07:38 AM

Just to toss more into the hat: I owned a 17-70 Sigma (older f/2.8-4.5) in my Alpha days and really liked it. The close focus at all FLs was ideal for me, and IQ was great. I now have a 16-45DA and am equally satisfied, similar features like close focus, a bit less range, but quick-shift focus is very nice. Sharp as I need worry about with my K-7.

I've seldom heard bad things about the 17-50 Tamron, but I've always have a fast 50 so that part of its allure never struck me, and my budget has always stopped just short of its price range. Good luck with your choice!

**NaClH2O** · 08-07-2010, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by jimH

I have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 on my K10 and it's my primary lens, and I love it. The IQ is great and color rendition is also very good. In the U.S. the Tamron lenses have a six year warranty, that is one of the reasons I bought it instead of the Sigma.

I don't know What shang is referring to about bad copies. Mine is perfect. I haven't heard of anyone getting a bad copy, however any lens from any manufacture can come out with an issue now and again.

I got a bad copy of this lens. It was quite soft at F2.8, by F4.0 it sharpened up considerably, F2.8 was barely useable. And it wasn't a DOF/Focus issue, it wasn't front or back focusing, just soft wide open.
To be truthful, I've never heard of anyone else with this problem, but I can document the issue.

NaCl(there are ALWAYS bad copies out there somewhere)H2O

taurus9 · 08-07-2010, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Muse

Also, as long as the question has come up about the F series vs. M series lenses and comparison of the primes with these zooms, may I ask:

How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8?

I have both Tamrons...not much difference between the two; the biggest difference is the heavy vignetting on the 17-50 at wide open apertures at 17mm and 50mm settings. If I were to nitpick, the bokeh on the 28-75 is slightly better than the 17-50 and the 17-50 is a bit sharper wide open and better built (mine has not broke yet).

Laurentiu Cristofor · 08-07-2010, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by Nightwings

HOWEVER .... I was awstruck as to how the kit lens (18-55) blew my K-X out of the water......and into the next state

.

Are you sure the Canon was equipped with the kit lens and not a higher end lens? The Canon kit lens is supposed to be inferior to the Pentax one (dpreview, photozone).

The Tamron 17-50 should be better than either kit lens.

Nightwings · 08-07-2010, 11:15 AM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

Are you sure the Canon was equipped with the kit lens and not a higher end lens? The Canon kit lens is supposed to be inferior to the Pentax one (dpreview, photozone).
The Tamron 17-50 should be better than either kit lens.

Positive ..... and if it's supposed to be inferior to the Pentax, it certainly wasn't under the catagory of IQ. The Canon kit lens CRUSHS the Pentax Kit.

CANON

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - Review / Test Report - Analysis

PENTAX

Pentax SMC-DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL - Review / Test Report - Analysis

shang · 08-07-2010, 12:45 PM

it's canon's newer version of kit lens, which is very impressive.

deadwolfbones · 08-07-2010, 01:27 PM

And that photozone link is for the older Pentax kit lens,.

08-07-2010, 01:28 AM	#20
Nightwings Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: WinterLand Posts: 19 Original Poster	Ok, I'll give you a point of reference I appreciate all the comments/advise. I do however have a request. I have a F 50mm 1.7 prime. It is obviously resolves better than my kit lens. Using the above mentioned prime ... how would the Tammy 17-50 compare to it? While I'm at it .... are the older M primes sharper than the F series?

08-07-2010, 07:46 AM	#25
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	I got a bad copy Originally posted by jimH I have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 on my K10 and it's my primary lens, and I love it. The IQ is great and color rendition is also very good. In the U.S. the Tamron lenses have a six year warranty, that is one of the reasons I bought it instead of the Sigma. I don't know What shang is referring to about bad copies. Mine is perfect. I haven't heard of anyone getting a bad copy, however any lens from any manufacture can come out with an issue now and again. I got a bad copy of this lens. It was quite soft at F2.8, by F4.0 it sharpened up considerably, F2.8 was barely useable. And it wasn't a DOF/Focus issue, it wasn't front or back focusing, just soft wide open. To be truthful, I've never heard of anyone else with this problem, but I can document the issue. NaCl(there are ALWAYS bad copies out there somewhere)H2O

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: [US] K20D, Metz 58 AF-1 Flash, FA 50mm 1.4, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, Tamron 18-250m	jasonfen	Sold Items	11	06-20-2010 06:32 AM
The K 55mm 1:1.8 - worth having with the M 50mm 1:1.7?	Jonathan Mac	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	21	06-01-2010 10:30 AM
Is the A 50mm 1.4 worth keeping?	Mickgriddle	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	04-08-2010 04:42 AM
Tamron Adaptall-1 70-350mm f4.5 worth?	rmtschanz	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	10-10-2009 10:43 AM
Upgrade to Tamron 17-50mm from kit 18-55mm: worth the investment?	virgilr	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	09-04-2009 07:33 AM

08-06-2010, 04:25 PM	#16
jackassp Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 813	Hi. I have both the Tamron 17-50 and the Pentax DA* 16-50, and both are exceptional, professional standard lenses. The Pentax lens is silent during focussing, it is weather proof, it is a very solid construction, but it suffers from a little more CA. The Tamron doesn't feel as solid, there are focussing problems, and it isn't 100% reliable at getting the AF correct, but most of the time it gives excellent images. I got a good one first up, but your mileage may vary... I would lean towards the Pentax lens. Cheers, John.

08-06-2010, 04:59 PM	#17
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	With a constant f2.8, the Tamron has a 2-stop advantage at the long end. That is worth a lot. I would buy new to get the warranty, unless used was an incredible deal. Even if "bad" it can be exchanged - unlike used ones.

08-06-2010, 11:29 PM	#18
ohyouloveme Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 79	one simple word - yes.

08-07-2010, 12:46 AM	#19
fractal Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,547	It's a good lens but it's built like shit. I broke the lens mount of mine accidentally. It didn't take much either. In saying that, I don't think i'd be forking out for the DA16-50. Just have to be careful with it. I took this street portrait with the Tammy 17-50 & K200D. It is a great walk-around lens. Bokeh is reasonable. Last edited by fractal; 08-07-2010 at 04:38 AM.*

08-07-2010, 01:32 AM	#21
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	Originally posted by fractal It's a good lens but it's built like shit. I broke the lens mount of mine accidentally. It didn't take much either. In saying that, I don't think i'd be forking out for the DA*16-50. Just have to be careful with it. I took with this street portrait with the Tammy 17-50 & K200D. It is a great walk-around lens. Bokeh is reasonable. Is this HST in this photo? Jason

08-07-2010, 03:19 AM	#22
Muse Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: SF Bay Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 211	Originally posted by deadwolfbones The Tamron focuses quite close, though it doesn't advertise itself as a macro lens. 10in for the Tamron vs. 8in for the Sigma. For the record, how close does the K-x 18-55mm kit lens focus? I have searched the specs in the manual and couldn't find it. Also, as long as the question has come up about the F series vs. M series lenses and comparison of the primes with these zooms, may I ask: How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8? Last edited by Muse; 08-07-2010 at 03:27 AM.

08-07-2010, 04:49 AM	#23
fractal Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,547	Originally posted by Jasvox Is this HST in this photo? Jason Almost man Just an eccentric bloke from the street. Originally posted by Muse How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8? It would make sense for them to be identical in IQ. If I was to do it again, i'd probably go the Sigma 18-50/2.8 for the close focus.

08-07-2010, 07:38 AM	#24
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	Just to toss more into the hat: I owned a 17-70 Sigma (older f/2.8-4.5) in my Alpha days and really liked it. The close focus at all FLs was ideal for me, and IQ was great. I now have a 16-45DA and am equally satisfied, similar features like close focus, a bit less range, but quick-shift focus is very nice. Sharp as I need worry about with my K-7. I've seldom heard bad things about the 17-50 Tamron, but I've always have a fast 50 so that part of its allure never struck me, and my budget has always stopped just short of its price range. Good luck with your choice!

08-07-2010, 08:57 AM	#26
taurus9 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: British Columbia Posts: 120	Originally posted by Muse Also, as long as the question has come up about the F series vs. M series lenses and comparison of the primes with these zooms, may I ask: How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8? I have both Tamrons...not much difference between the two; the biggest difference is the heavy vignetting on the 17-50 at wide open apertures at 17mm and 50mm settings. If I were to nitpick, the bokeh on the 28-75 is slightly better than the 17-50 and the 17-50 is a bit sharper wide open and better built (mine has not broke yet).

08-07-2010, 09:48 AM	#27
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by Nightwings HOWEVER .... I was awstruck as to how the kit lens (18-55) blew my K-X out of the water......and into the next state . Are you sure the Canon was equipped with the kit lens and not a higher end lens? The Canon kit lens is supposed to be inferior to the Pentax one (dpreview, photozone). The Tamron 17-50 should be better than either kit lens.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-07-2010, 11:15 AM	#28
Nightwings Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: WinterLand Posts: 19 Original Poster	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Are you sure the Canon was equipped with the kit lens and not a higher end lens? The Canon kit lens is supposed to be inferior to the Pentax one (dpreview, photozone). The Tamron 17-50 should be better than either kit lens. Positive ..... and if it's supposed to be inferior to the Pentax, it certainly wasn't under the catagory of IQ. The Canon kit lens CRUSHS the Pentax Kit. CANON Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - Review / Test Report - Analysis PENTAX Pentax SMC-DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL - Review / Test Report - Analysis

08-07-2010, 12:45 PM	#29
shang Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: long island Posts: 135	it's canon's newer version of kit lens, which is very impressive.

08-07-2010, 01:27 PM	#30
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	And that photozone link is for the older Pentax kit lens,.