Tamron 17-50 F2.8

**eccs19** · 07-15-2012, 03:27 PM

I have a love / hate relationship with this lens. Just curious as to others thoughts on this lens. Here's my story with it.

This lens, when it focuses accurately seems very sharp. (for the most part, see my other comment below)
I do find that my keeper rate with this lens is lower than most of my other lenses, as it seems to miss focus more times that I'd like. I've tried to check for Front / back focusing issues, but always seem to get mixed results.
Yesterday I came across a scene that I thought would be a nice scene to have nice and sharp from the front of the frame right to the back of the scene, so I closed the lens all the way down. I used timer, tripod, everything so I would get the results that I hoped for. Was I ever disappointed when I got home. I did a few frames, just in case, but each one is soft as hell. No good detail anywhere in the image. Does this lens really go to hell closed up all the way? I've owned this lens from new, so I could send it in, but if it's just nature of the beast for it to be this way, then so be it.

**nicoprod** · 07-15-2012, 04:21 PM

I used to have this lens... Same love/hate relationship. I think different copies of this lens offer different results. I know it sounds silly but I've read a bunch of professional review of this lens and they... disagree.
Overall I don't think stopping all the way down always works the best for sharpness.
My copy was great from f4 to f11, I don't really care for going above f9 anyway but I sure missed f2.8 or even f3.5 and I found the tammy unreliable wide open. I mean for the price it's unbeatable....
I now have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and it works much better on my k-5 and it's much more quieter.

Sol Invictus · 07-15-2012, 05:06 PM

I'm more in the love camp but the lens does have some shortcomings. Usually, even wide open I get a fair number of keepers. I may just have a good copy. The build quality is nothing to rave about, I HATE the lens hood and it is rather noisy though. If Pentax improves the DA* 16-50mm I am jumping ship faster than you can say full-frame (hey someone had to mention it!)

Funny enough, I have trouble with my FA 43. Both in terms of focusing and softness wide open.

rawr · 07-15-2012, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by eccs19

Does this lens really go to hell closed up all the way?

Yes. Most lenses will. Diffraction effects will eat up all your sharpness when you close the lens right up. Look at the lens reviews for the Tammy on any site like lenstip.com or photozone etc. The Tammy is sharpest between f2.8 and f8 - at f32 it will be as soft as all hell.

I have that lens and have no problems with FF/BF or sharpness. It is however my second copy - my first was dead on arrival, the second one has been good for several years.

lytrytyr · 07-16-2012, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by eccs19

I do find that my keeper rate with this lens is lower than most of my other lenses, as it seems to miss focus more times that I'd like.

For critical use on the K-x (with no official FF/BF correction),
I've found that contrast-detect autofocus in live view, while slow, really nails it.

sb in ak · 07-16-2012, 08:57 AM

I used a Tamron 17-50 (non IS version) on an old Canon 20D. I had somewhat of a love/hate relationship with it as well. It could produce very sharp images, but I found that it hunted a lot (may have just been the camera), which wasn't good as it had a really noisy AF. I've heard a lot of reports that IQ varies quite a bit with these lenses and that several people have to buy and return until they get a "good" copy. Not really sure how much of this is true but it may have some weight. The large f number is probably playing a role here though.

TZH · 07-17-2012, 05:37 AM

Originally posted by nicoprod

I mean for the price it's unbeatable....

I can't agree any more!
Noisy af really annoying some time, and I just fixed my A16 front filter ring wobble .. But I still love this lens a lot.

tlwyse · 07-17-2012, 07:27 AM

I've had this lens for a few months now and really like it now that I've got the AF adjustment more-or-less dialed in. I did some focusing tests just last week and compared it with my DA Limited 70mm. The Tamron was within a gnat's hair of the 70mm Limited but absolutely blew away the Limited when it came to chromatic aberration...it was non-existent with the Tamron while the 70 Limited had it going on all over the place.

The only "aberration" with this lens was an outdoor model shoot I did last Friday. Even though it was an overcast day, It was focusing fine out in the open....but as soon as the model and I ventured into the woods and started shooting in shade, focus accuracy went all to hell. I played around with the AF adjustment but nothing really helped. Moving out of the woods back into the open, focus was fine again.

All-in-all, I've been very happy with the Tamron.....the fact that it is virtually indistinguishable from the 70mm Limited really surprised me.

Terry

purwoadi · 07-19-2012, 07:05 AM

I have this lens for several months and love it for the value of money it gives. At F2.8 I can isolate the subject quite well with beautiful bokeh and at F5.6 it gives a very sharp images. One problem is its "noisy" autofocus, but it still ok for most of landscape pictures I made. For candid photography, I think for other lens, may be FA 77mm/F1.8 or
SMC-P F 35-70mm/F3.5. Regards, Michael

yusuf · 07-22-2012, 12:42 AM - **1 Like**

Actually the keeper ratio with this lens is in par with other lenses I own, so I guess nothing wrong with the lens but more to do with keeper rate of Pentax AF. Overall, I am happy with this lens. Here is one shot with k-x + Tamron 17-50mm at wide open.

cali92rs · 07-22-2012, 05:04 PM

I have had this lens for a few months and it has been by far my most used lens. Sharp wide open and stupid sharp by f5.6. Oh and there is a DxO module for it now

The only negative comment I have is that its noisy. I have no problem with focus. Not to say that others don't have this problem, I just haven't.

alamo5000 · 07-22-2012, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by cali92rs

I have had this lens for a few months and it has been by far my most used lens. Sharp wide open and stupid sharp by f5.6. Oh and there is a DxO module for it now

The only negative comment I have is that its noisy. I have no problem with focus. Not to say that others don't have this problem, I just haven't.

What does DxO module mean?

cali92rs · 07-22-2012, 10:18 PM

Originally posted by alamo5000

What does DxO module mean?

DXO optics pro is a software package:
Supported equipment

msatlas · 07-24-2012, 01:37 PM

I was pretty annoyed with my 17-50/2.8 until I dialed in the focus adjustment on my K-r. My copy needed a -5 adjustment. Since then it's been much improved. But I find myself using my DA 35/2.4 more frequently when I'm going to be shooting wide open a lot. The Tamron is pretty good for a zoom at f/2.8 but the 35/2.4 is noticeably sharper.

That said, at wider angles, the available primes have much less advantage over the Tamron. That's more due to lack of outstanding wide angle primes than because the Tamron gets better at wider angles. Just make sure to stop down to f/4 at 17mm since f/2.8 at 17mm is the lens's weak spot.

anthers · 07-24-2012, 10:58 PM

Is it the lens or the body? I have a fair number of soft images from shooting with shutter speeds between 1/100 and 1/180, due to the shutter shake on my K7. Also remember the SR should be turned off on the tripod.

My 17-50 returns pretty acceptable results, I shoot it from f2.8 to 5.6, rarely to f8 or f11. I use MF almost exclusively. It's at its best from around 20mm to 50mm, but 17mm is quite usable most of the time. I rarely have issues with sharpness at f2.8 myself.

07-15-2012, 03:27 PM	#1
eccs19 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Lisle, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,510	Tamron 17-50 F2.8 I have a love / hate relationship with this lens. Just curious as to others thoughts on this lens. Here's my story with it. This lens, when it focuses accurately seems very sharp. (for the most part, see my other comment below) I do find that my keeper rate with this lens is lower than most of my other lenses, as it seems to miss focus more times that I'd like. I've tried to check for Front / back focusing issues, but always seem to get mixed results. Yesterday I came across a scene that I thought would be a nice scene to have nice and sharp from the front of the frame right to the back of the scene, so I closed the lens all the way down. I used timer, tripod, everything so I would get the results that I hoped for. Was I ever disappointed when I got home. I did a few frames, just in case, but each one is soft as hell. No good detail anywhere in the image. Does this lens really go to hell closed up all the way? I've owned this lens from new, so I could send it in, but if it's just nature of the beast for it to be this way, then so be it.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tamron 17-50mm, Tamron 28-75mm, Sigma 17-70mm, which lens for my trip to Greece?	macky112	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	11-20-2011 03:08 PM
Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 or Tamron 28-75mm f2.8	tubamatt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	08-15-2010 04:15 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron SP 70-210mm f/3.5, Tamron SP 28-135mm f/4.0-4.5 28A, Tamron pk/a adapta	hinman	Sold Items	14	05-08-2009 05:35 PM

07-15-2012, 04:21 PM	#2
nicoprod Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: New Berlin, WI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 528	I used to have this lens... Same love/hate relationship. I think different copies of this lens offer different results. I know it sounds silly but I've read a bunch of professional review of this lens and they... disagree. Overall I don't think stopping all the way down always works the best for sharpness. My copy was great from f4 to f11, I don't really care for going above f9 anyway but I sure missed f2.8 or even f3.5 and I found the tammy unreliable wide open. I mean for the price it's unbeatable.... I now have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and it works much better on my k-5 and it's much more quieter.

07-15-2012, 05:06 PM	#3
Sol Invictus Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Calgary, Alberta Photos: Gallery Posts: 392	I'm more in the love camp but the lens does have some shortcomings. Usually, even wide open I get a fair number of keepers. I may just have a good copy. The build quality is nothing to rave about, I HATE the lens hood and it is rather noisy though. If Pentax improves the DA* 16-50mm I am jumping ship faster than you can say full-frame (hey someone had to mention it!) Funny enough, I have trouble with my FA 43. Both in terms of focusing and softness wide open.

07-15-2012, 06:21 PM	#4
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by eccs19 Does this lens really go to hell closed up all the way? Yes. Most lenses will. Diffraction effects will eat up all your sharpness when you close the lens right up. Look at the lens reviews for the Tammy on any site like lenstip.com or photozone etc. The Tammy is sharpest between f2.8 and f8 - at f32 it will be as soft as all hell. I have that lens and have no problems with FF/BF or sharpness. It is however my second copy - my first was dead on arrival, the second one has been good for several years.

07-16-2012, 07:48 AM	#5
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by eccs19 I do find that my keeper rate with this lens is lower than most of my other lenses, as it seems to miss focus more times that I'd like. For critical use on the K-x (with no official FF/BF correction), I've found that contrast-detect autofocus in live view, while slow, really nails it.

07-16-2012, 08:57 AM	#6
sb in ak Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Omaha, NE Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 612	I used a Tamron 17-50 (non IS version) on an old Canon 20D. I had somewhat of a love/hate relationship with it as well. It could produce very sharp images, but I found that it hunted a lot (may have just been the camera), which wasn't good as it had a really noisy AF. I've heard a lot of reports that IQ varies quite a bit with these lenses and that several people have to buy and return until they get a "good" copy. Not really sure how much of this is true but it may have some weight. The large f number is probably playing a role here though.

07-17-2012, 05:37 AM	#7
TZH Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Kuala Lumpur Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 118	Originally posted by nicoprod I mean for the price it's unbeatable.... I can't agree any more! Noisy af really annoying some time, and I just fixed my A16 front filter ring wobble .. But I still love this lens a lot.

07-17-2012, 07:27 AM	#8
tlwyse Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Waxhaw, NC, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 211	I've had this lens for a few months now and really like it now that I've got the AF adjustment more-or-less dialed in. I did some focusing tests just last week and compared it with my DA Limited 70mm. The Tamron was within a gnat's hair of the 70mm Limited but absolutely blew away the Limited when it came to chromatic aberration...it was non-existent with the Tamron while the 70 Limited had it going on all over the place. The only "aberration" with this lens was an outdoor model shoot I did last Friday. Even though it was an overcast day, It was focusing fine out in the open....but as soon as the model and I ventured into the woods and started shooting in shade, focus accuracy went all to hell. I played around with the AF adjustment but nothing really helped. Moving out of the woods back into the open, focus was fine again. All-in-all, I've been very happy with the Tamron.....the fact that it is virtually indistinguishable from the 70mm Limited really surprised me. Terry

07-19-2012, 07:05 AM	#9
purwoadi New Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: jakarta, Indonesia Photos: Gallery Posts: 15	I have this lens for several months and love it for the value of money it gives. At F2.8 I can isolate the subject quite well with beautiful bokeh and at F5.6 it gives a very sharp images. One problem is its "noisy" autofocus, but it still ok for most of landscape pictures I made. For candid photography, I think for other lens, may be FA 77mm/F1.8 or SMC-P F 35-70mm/F3.5. Regards, Michael

07-22-2012, 12:42 AM - 1 Like	#10
yusuf Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,497	Actually the keeper ratio with this lens is in par with other lenses I own, so I guess nothing wrong with the lens but more to do with keeper rate of Pentax AF. Overall, I am happy with this lens. Here is one shot with k-x + Tamron 17-50mm at wide open.

07-22-2012, 05:04 PM	#11
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	I have had this lens for a few months and it has been by far my most used lens. Sharp wide open and stupid sharp by f5.6. Oh and there is a DxO module for it now The only negative comment I have is that its noisy. I have no problem with focus. Not to say that others don't have this problem, I just haven't.

07-22-2012, 09:35 PM	#12
alamo5000 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 2,962	Originally posted by cali92rs I have had this lens for a few months and it has been by far my most used lens. Sharp wide open and stupid sharp by f5.6. Oh and there is a DxO module for it now The only negative comment I have is that its noisy. I have no problem with focus. Not to say that others don't have this problem, I just haven't. What does DxO module mean?

07-22-2012, 10:18 PM	#13
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by alamo5000 What does DxO module mean? DXO optics pro is a software package: Supported equipment

07-24-2012, 01:37 PM	#14
msatlas Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 309	I was pretty annoyed with my 17-50/2.8 until I dialed in the focus adjustment on my K-r. My copy needed a -5 adjustment. Since then it's been much improved. But I find myself using my DA 35/2.4 more frequently when I'm going to be shooting wide open a lot. The Tamron is pretty good for a zoom at f/2.8 but the 35/2.4 is noticeably sharper. That said, at wider angles, the available primes have much less advantage over the Tamron. That's more due to lack of outstanding wide angle primes than because the Tamron gets better at wider angles. Just make sure to stop down to f/4 at 17mm since f/2.8 at 17mm is the lens's weak spot.

07-24-2012, 10:58 PM	#15
anthers Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: California Photos: Albums Posts: 125	Is it the lens or the body? I have a fair number of soft images from shooting with shutter speeds between 1/100 and 1/180, due to the shutter shake on my K7. Also remember the SR should be turned off on the tripod. My 17-50 returns pretty acceptable results, I shoot it from f2.8 to 5.6, rarely to f8 or f11. I use MF almost exclusively. It's at its best from around 20mm to 50mm, but 17mm is quite usable most of the time. I rarely have issues with sharpness at f2.8 myself.