[pres589]

17mm? That lens must be pretty rare.

It's not that rare although I don't think there's tons of them around. Came in two flavors. I like the size of the lens itself, it's nice to focus, and seems pretty well made. For some reason they didn't cut filter threads into the end of the barrel so filters screw into the hood. The hood is really large in diameter but fairly shallow so I'm not sure how good it really is at being a hood. The hood is held on with set screws. They're harder to find than the lens itself. So it's kind of a mixed bag. It also doesn't do starbursts all that well although they aren't horrible.

Overall I prefer this lens to my Samyang 14mm f2.8 due to size and weight. They're both pretty nice to have in my collection. Tokina made a 17mm f3.5 around the same time as Tamron although it doesn't seem quite as good from an IQ standpoint. It probably handles a bit nicer due to a slightly better hood & filters situation.

[timw4mail]

It's not that rare although I don't think there's tons of them around. Came in two flavors. I like the size of the lens itself, it's nice to focus, and seems pretty well made. For some reason they didn't cut filter threads into the end of the barrel so filters screw into the hood. The hood is really large in diameter but fairly shallow so I'm not sure how good it really is at being a hood. The hood is held on with set screws. They're harder to find than the lens itself. So it's kind of a mixed bag. It also doesn't do starbursts all that well although they aren't horrible.

Overall I prefer this lens to my Samyang 14mm f2.8 due to size and weight. They're both pretty nice to have in my collection. Tokina made a 17mm f3.5 around the same time as Tamron although it doesn't seem quite as good from an IQ standpoint. It probably handles a bit nicer due to a slightly better hood & filters situation.

So, is it rectilinear?

[pres589]

So, is it rectilinear?

Indeed.

[cooltouch]

I have two of 'em, one with the hood and one without. As pres589 states, the hoods are rare. And when they do turn up on eBay, people want a ton for them.

I also have the Vivitar version of the Tokina 17mm. From what I understand, the biggest difference between the Vivitar and Tokina versions is the Tokina has a slightly better set of coatings than the Vivitar. Mine behaves more like an ultra-wide than the Tamron. By that, I mean that very little focusing is necessary, since just about everything is already in focus because of its depth of field. In this respect, the Tamron behaves more like a longer focal length lens, that is, more focusing is required. Is this because of a difference in the focusing helicals between the two lenses? I dunno, maybe. I haven't compared the helical movements, to be honest. As for image quaility comparisons between the Vivitar/Tokina and the Tamron, I can't really see much of a difference between the two. I think the Tamron is a bit better corrected for barrel distortion, but that's about it.

[dsmithhfx]

Hp5

[pres589]

I have two of 'em, one with the hood and one without. As pres589 states, the hoods are rare. And when they do turn up on eBay, people want a ton for them.

I also have the Vivitar version of the Tokina 17mm. From what I understand, the biggest difference between the Vivitar and Tokina versions is the Tokina has a slightly better set of coatings than the Vivitar. Mine behaves more like an ultra-wide than the Tamron. By that, I mean that very little focusing is necessary, since just about everything is already in focus because of its depth of field. In this respect, the Tamron behaves more like a longer focal length lens, that is, more focusing is required. Is this because of a difference in the focusing helicals between the two lenses? I dunno, maybe. I haven't compared the helical movements, to be honest. As for image quaility comparisons between the Vivitar/Tokina and the Tamron, I can't really see much of a difference between the two. I think the Tamron is a bit better corrected for barrel distortion, but that's about it.

That is pretty much everything I've read about these lenses as well.

I've wished for one of today's 3rd parties like Samyang or Laowa to show up with a modern 17 or 18mm f3.something prime to replace these lenses. Something that's similarly sized but with a modern hood, normal filter threading, etc. I don't think it'll ever happen.

[Bonner04]

All 254 feet of the largest sloop ever built when she was launched in 2003. I shot this while she was in port in Cape Town, South Africa with my Canonet QL G-III and Kodak Portra 400.

Attached Images

 

[cooltouch]

That is pretty much everything I've read about these lenses as well.

I've wished for one of today's 3rd parties like Samyang or Laowa to show up with a modern 17 or 18mm f3.something prime to replace these lenses. Something that's similarly sized but with a modern hood, normal filter threading, etc. I don't think it'll ever happen.

What about your Samyang 14? Too much? Or is it a full-frame fish-eye? When I think of the Samyang 14, I am reminded of the Canon FD 14/2.8 L, which was just an incredible rectilinear lens. I wonder how the two compare . . .

[pres589]

It really is a case of "too much". The hood is bonkers, it doesn't take normal filters, it's huge. I don't need an optic that wide. 17mm with my Tamron is plenty if not a bit much. It's like a party trick and not a generally useful lens if that makes sense.

[dsmithhfx]

Mamiyaflex C2, Fujicolor 400

[k1man]

This was taken at Arles Corrida Pentax 645 300mm F4 fuji film canoscan

[k1man]

This one also at Arles not the sharpest but just to show what happens sometimes

[cooltouch]

Good capture. Sharpness is overrated.

---------- Post added 09-09-18 at 03:04 AM ----------

It really is a case of "too much". The hood is bonkers, it doesn't take normal filters, it's huge. I don't need an optic that wide. 17mm with my Tamron is plenty if not a bit much. It's like a party trick and not a generally useful lens if that makes sense.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I find that I often crop my 17's photos down quite a bit. Mostly I use it to get everything I'm after in the frame, but then I usually have a huge amount of empty foreground in the photo. So I crop . . . almost defeats the purpose.

[dsmithhfx]

HP5

[Swift1]

Canon 7 rangefinder
Canon 50/2.2 LTM
Kodak Ektar 100
Epson V750