[MiguelATF]

Just a quick post to share with anyone out there who's considering upgrading their 18-55 kit lens with the faster Tammy 17-50 f/2.8 -----

Do it.

I just purchased a used one in good condition from a fellow Pentaxian and....

It's every bit as good as all those reviews I read indicated.

Yes, it's larger and heavier than my old 18-55. But along with the heaviness, there is a quality feeling to the lens - it feels very very well made. Seriously better than other (also good but cheaper) Tamrons I've used or handled. Everything about the lens breathes quality.

And btw the lens it replaced - the second generation or II version of the Pentax DA 18-55 kit that came with my K200D - was not a shabby lens either. Quite a good one as a matter of fact.

But the Tammy is better. And, yes, it costs a few hundred bucks more. And yes, sometimes, near tax time, or given the occasionally precarious state of a person's individual bank account (I'm an unemployed writer), a few hundred bucks can be a steep outlay. But in this case....worth every penny of it.

Here's a shot the other morning of the flowering magnolia in our (southern Oregon) back 40, on a brisk cold Spring morning. Unretouched, unprocessed.

Need I say more?

Good job to both the Tammy engineers who designed it - and to all those fellow Pentaxians who have recommended the lens on this forum the last few millenia.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[calsan]

Nice
How about at the wide end?

[krp]

I agree. I've had mine for over a year and it's still my most used lens. It's a lens that can be used for everything except telephoto.

[guinnessman]

I'm glad, I just bought a used copy off of KEH, and between what I've heard about this lens, and my experiences with KEH, it should be a good one.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I briefly owned a Tamron 17-50mm, and my experience was very similar to yours, but I ended up returning it. I noticed that it was darker than my Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and my Pentax 18-55mm kit lens at identical apertures. The problem got worse as I stopped down, and by f/9 or f/10 it was a full stop darker, but even wide open it was still a half-stop darker, like around f3.3 equivalent. I returned it, since I wanted an f/2.8 lens that acted like an f/2.8 lens. You can see pictures from my 17-50mm here demonstrating the problem:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/124013-tamron-...-k-x-pics.html

I know this lens is generally praised, so I've always wondered it it was just my copy, or if this is common and most people just don't notice it. If you still have your kit lens around you might try shooting an identical scene at f/10, and see if exposure is the same with both lenses.

[utopian]

i think it depends on copies, my frens 17-50 was pretty lousy at f2.8 somehow, it wasnt as sharp as ppl said it was and i was quite disappointed after using it. but when i decided to take the plunge and get my own, because it simply seemed the best option, i got a sharp copy and boy is it really good. as for edgar's experience i think you may have a point there, cos i was taking pics and comparing them to a few of my primes, and i realised at the same aperture and focal length the pictures turn out more yellowish, probably due to the coating, and that the shutter speed is a little slower, like 1/30 compared to 1/40, but i dont noe if it is due to the camera (a k7 and eventually a k01) .

[Edgar_in_Indy]

i was taking pics and comparing them to a few of my primes, and i realised at the same aperture and focal length...that the shutter speed is a little slower, like 1/30 compared to 1/40, but i dont noe if it is due to the camera (a k7 and eventually a k01) .

Interesting. It sounds like your 17-50 may also be darker compared to your other lenses.

I almost always shoot manual, so I noticed that pictures were underexposed when switching from the 28-75mm to the 17-50mm, but keeping the same settings. If you shoot in Av mode though, and your lens was darker than other lenses, then your camera would compensate by giving you slower shutter speeds, but properly exposed pictures.

---

Last edited by Edgar_in_Indy; 04-15-2012 at 10:04 AM.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I was just going back and reading my old thread, and came across this observation I had made at the time:

"I also noticed that when I use the "green button" on my K-x to let it set the appropriate shutter speed, it sets the speed slightly lower with the 17-50mm lens than with the 28-75mm lens. I tried this several times with both lenses pointing at the same subject. This tells me that the K-x is seeing less light from the 17-50mm lens, so it is reducing the shutter speed to compensate."

If you look at the lenses in my signature, they have all behaved as expected at given apertures. The 17-50mm is the only lens with which I ever experienced this problem.

[RickyFromVegas]

I do like it. It's one of the better lenses I own.
Quick to focus, pretty accurate, and its bokeh smooth.
I only recently sold it because I have too many manual lenses in that FL, and needed the money. If not, I would've kept it.

[ablundon]

I got mine four days ago and so far I am very pleased as well. Great build as you say. Love the feel. Looks great on my K-r.

I have noticed that I sometimes miss focus. Not sure what the problem is. This is my first AF lens with 2.8 at 50 mm. Perhaps I just need practice. My Canon S type focus screen really helps as I can see that the focus is not correct before I even shoot. Sometimes I half press the shutter button 3 or 4 times before the correct focus occurs. I've only taken about 50 shots so I'm going to give it time.

[civiletti]

I got the Tamron 17-50 for work - product images, but prefer it to my primes under 50mm for tripod mounted landscape work. The IQ is impressive from 17mm. At 50mm, if I'm not in a hurry, I switch to an A50/2.8, which is tough to match. But even shooting landscapes, the speed of a zoom is useful, as is the seamless choice of focal length.

[reed_page]

Congratulations, by the looks of things, you are starting off with the lens well.
I got a good copy of this lens about six months ago and it really fills in the shorter range. I wasn't fond of the feel initially, but now it is on my camera more than any of my other lenses.

[chickenandavocado]

i have to agree, if you get a good copy of this lens it is excellent

initially i got it as I found the da limited's a little lacking in speed, whilst the tammy could deliver at f2.8 pretty well... however didn't end up using it at all (stuck with my fa 31!) so off it went

[Jonathan Mac]

I was out shooting with mine yesterday. Nice and sharp, yes, great colours & rendering, yes, but the chronic & unpredictable under-exposure varying from 0.3 EV to 2 EV still drives me crazy.

[MiguelATF]

This taken this weekend, a slightly wider angle than the previous shot posted (which btw was in Macro mode).

Photo has not been retouched or processed at all.

This is a great lens.