Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-09-2011, 10:45 AM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
gda13's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 939
Sharpness issues with tamron 17-35mm any ideas

So I got this lens from KEH rated at EX+ condition. The lens body is in fantastic shape, looks new. However I went around the house taking some test shots with auto AF and for some reason all the shots are like the ones below. Not sharp at all. So far all lenses that I have bought either new or used here on market place have not had such issues so my knowledge of what could potentially be causing this is extremely limited and I was hoping someone could give me some insight from their experienced based on what they see in the pictures below. Any ideas...I really want to like this lens but will return it if it is not something that can be resolved.

Attached Images
     

Last edited by gda13; 09-09-2011 at 12:16 PM. Reason: grammatical error
09-09-2011, 10:46 AM   #2
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
That looks REALLY off. Did you try manual focusing?

Although that last shot looks almost like the middle is in focus and you were wide open, but it's still unforgivably soft/blurry..
09-09-2011, 10:51 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 114
Its called "Welcome to the aftermarket lens lottery". Sometimes you get a good copy, sometimes you don't. Happens with all lens.
Send it back and get another copy if they have one, and try again.
09-09-2011, 11:00 AM   #4
Pentaxian
Moderator Emeritus




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,648
If this is the f2.8-4 version, I have the same lens and it's very sharp. Either you were using shutter speeds that are far too slow or this lens has been dropped and there's an element knocked out of place. If that's the case, then return it. But first, put it on a tripod and turn the SR off. Take a few more test shots where camera shake isn't a factor.

09-09-2011, 11:33 AM   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
gda13's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 939
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
That looks REALLY off. Did you try manual focusing?

Although that last shot looks almost like the middle is in focus and you were wide open, but it's still unforgivably soft/blurry..
See pictures below for manual focused shots. Still seems problematic except for when stopped down to 5.6 or higher but only the center seems to be in focus even in 35mm (long end) shots

QuoteOriginally posted by vario Quote
Its called "Welcome to the aftermarket lens lottery". Sometimes you get a good copy, sometimes you don't. Happens with all lens.
Send it back and get another copy if they have one, and try again.
So far I've been lucky, just trying to see if there is something other than internal problems causing these issues. The glass looks spot free from what I can tell. so...

QuoteOriginally posted by Peter Zack Quote
If this is the f2.8-4 version, I have the same lens and it's very sharp. Either you were using shutter speeds that are far too slow or this lens has been dropped and there's an element knocked out of place. If that's the case, then return it. But first, put it on a tripod and turn the SR off. Take a few more test shots where camera shake isn't a factor.
I have seen example shots from this lens and what I have seen so far doesn't lead me to believe any part of the image should be this soft even at wide. Could you give me your experience with this lens in terms of sharpness i.e. through out frame, at certain aperture etc...This lens doesn't show up for sale very often anymore so would hate to have to get rid of it. If I have to return it I guess I'll just have to keep being vigilant for a copy that's for sale.


Shot parameters

Pic1) 17mm f2.8 1/125s iso100
Pic2) 17mm f3.5 1/125s iso125
Pic3) 17mm f5.6 1/125s iso500
Pic4) 17mm f8.0 1/125s iso1000
Pic5) 35mm f4.0 1/125s iso160
Pic6) 35mm f8.0 1/125s iso640
Attached Images
           
09-09-2011, 02:35 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mississippi, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 580
I have this lens in the EX version. Sharp lens and no where near as soft as what you're showing. The shots also appear to be Diffused somewhat.
I'd send it back, your's has a problem.
09-09-2011, 02:52 PM   #7
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,637
I agree that the lens has a problem. I had this lens for my K-x, but just sold it this week. I didn't use it extensively, but I found the sharpness to be acceptable. Not as good as my Tamron 28-75mm, but not bad either. I'd send it back immediately if I were you. In its current condition, it seems to be worse than useless.
09-09-2011, 02:53 PM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
gda13's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 939
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by thazooo Quote
I have this lens in the EX version. Sharp lens and no where near as soft as what you're showing. The shots also appear to be Diffused somewhat.
I'd send it back, your's has a problem.

Yeah...did more test shooting and nothing seemed work. Its definitely the lens, I already got it packed up in the box and going to get an RMA from KEH tomorrow and send it back. What a shame, I was pretty stoked to actually find this lens but that was short lived

09-09-2011, 02:56 PM   #9
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
gda13's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 939
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
I agree that the lens has a problem. I had this lens for my K-x, but just sold it this week. I didn't use it extensively, but I found the sharpness to be acceptable. Not as good as my Tamron 28-75mm, but not bad either. I'd send it back immediately if I were you. In its current condition, it seems to be worse than useless.
What did you sell it for? I'm also planning to get the 28-75, but wanted this version as a compliment to that.
09-10-2011, 05:19 AM   #10
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,637
QuoteOriginally posted by gda13 Quote
What did you sell it for? I'm also planning to get the 28-75, but wanted this version as a compliment to that.
I sold the 17-35mm in order to help finance an ultra-wide zoom...namely, the Sigma 8-16mm. However, before I could get a chance to buy the ultra-wide, I saw a Sigma 170-500mm on eBay for $325 + $15 s/h, and for the price I couldn't resist.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/260847970757?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984....#ht_500wt_1413

So for now my lens piggy bank is too depleted the ultra-wide. I'll probably play around with the 170-500mm for a while and then sell it, hopefully for a profit. That's what I usually try to do. I bought the 17-35mm together with a Sigma 70-300mm from someone locally on Craigslist for $120 for both lenses. So I guess you could say I paid $60 for the 17-35mm. I started the auction at $1 and it sold for $203:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/130569249662?ssPageName=STRK:MESOX:IT&_trksid=p3984....ht_3920wt_1396

I'll probably be putting the 70-300mm up for sale before too long, and I hope to get a similar price.

Last edited by Edgar_in_Indy; 09-10-2011 at 05:52 AM.
09-10-2011, 10:36 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
gda13's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 939
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
So I guess you could say I paid $60 for the 17-35mm. I started the auction at $1 and it sold for $203:

That's cool. I would have payed what you sold it for. I'm sure it wasn't as sharp as the 28-75mm but if its a good copy should be pretty good based on some of the example shots I've seen. I am in the market for the 28-75mm too partly due to some of the examples I've seen in your thread but largely because of the 70-200mm tamron that I recently picked up, that lens is razor sharp...and good color rendition to boot. I'm sold on the fast tamrons so long as they are a good copy. I may even consider the 10-24mm someday to have a whole suite of tammy zooms to balance out my pentax primes. Its too bad there is too much overlap between the 17-50mm and the 28-78... or is there? Something to think about, but I do like the internal focusing of the 17-35mm.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
below, issues, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, shots, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-7 Sharpness issues ntlegg Pentax DSLR Discussion 48 03-22-2013 08:46 AM
Tripod Collar for Tamron 300mm 5.6 (54B) - Any ideas? MrEspie Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 11-08-2010 08:54 PM
Sharpness: DA 17-70 vs. Tamron 28-75 starbase218 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 07-26-2010 01:15 PM
Sharpness comparison between Pentax 18-55 and Tamron 17-50mm Rafalas Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 93 02-08-2010 07:23 AM
Tamron 70-200 or Pentax 50-135 in sharpness LeDave Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 11-15-2009 09:53 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:13 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top