Tamron AF17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD [IF] SP

Excellent walk-around workhorse. I needed a zoom with 2.8 and nice bokeh, and I've seen mostly good reviews on this lens so I bought. It stays on my camera about 60% of the time, for it's versatility, compactness and light weight. At first I had no complaints at all, then once I was comparing my images with friend's Nikon 17-55mm 2.8, and I noticed that the color rendition is slightly different. Nikon glass has its own unique color (it's hard to describe), but it's existing with almost every decent Nikon lens. Maybe Tamron is slightly warmer (NB: D300 owners can tune-up color for up to 10 lenses). I contemplated of trading up for Nikon 17-55mm, but that lens costs a lot and is BIG, while image quality is in the same league. I do a lot of travel photography, and the bulk can scare people off when coming close. Tamron actually beats Nikon in some sharpness tests. I only wish it could be longer (like Nikon) - that would be great for portraits. Overall, great lens, and thanks to Tamron.

- sharp enough for my needs
- compact and lightweight!!!
- great contrast and color
- low price (think price/performance)
- it's got zoom lock (come on, Nikon, it's a little piece of plastic!!)

- none in respect to quality
- i wish it was a little longer
- to my personal taste (most people won't notice this probably) Nikon's 17-55mm lens delivers the color i like better.

Sigma 28-70mm EX 2.8, Tamron 28-75mm XR Di, Nikon 17-55mm 2.8 DX, Nikon 18-70mm, Nikon 18-200mm VR, Sigma 18-200mm, Sigma 30mm 1.4, Nikon 50mm 1.4, Nikon 50mm 1.8, Nikon 60mm 2.8 Macro, Nikon 85mm 1.8, Tamron 90mm 2.8 Macro and several film only older lenses.

I have not used Tamron's CS for this lens, but did in the past for my other lenses. It's always been simply EXCELLENT. I remember lenses coming back working better than they were working before. And repairs' cost is great.

I bought the Tamron 17-50 as a wide angle complement to my much used Tamron 28-75. I tried out 2 samples with my Fuji S3 and S5 pro, but had to find out in the end that the 17-50 is a good, but not excellent lens.

Overall sharpness is lower than on the Tamron 28-75, distortion at the wide end is quite visible with architecture etc. and often has to be removed with software.

Like on the other Tamron, CA is visible with strong contrasts and the AF is slow and relatively noisy.

While sharpness is acceptable or even good on this lens, basic resolution of the glass is only ok, very fine detail is not rendered the way excellent lenses do. I'd say the resolution limit of this lens is just below 10MP.

For comparision: I also bought the cheap plastic Nikon 18-55mm kit lens which is not as fast as the Tamron, but sharper except maybe in the last bit of the angles. As the Nikon is more silent, lighter and cheaper than the Tamron, I will keep the Nikon.

- wide aperture of F2,8 across the range
- not as heavy as pro grade lenses
- relatively low price

- slow and relatively noisy AF, no AF-S/ USM
- CA in strong contrast regions
- edges are less than stellar
- overall resolution is good, but not as good as I have hoped

- Nikon 18-55mm f3,5-5,6 II
- Nikon 17-55mm/ f2,8

Not needed -

I have been using nikon digital for some time now and have used a lot of professional level nikon lenses. I was in need of a wide angle zoom and was doing my homework. Nikon offers basically the same zoom in f2.8 at around $2000 AU dollars. (constant f stop lenses through their entire focual length is considered a professional grade lens for those who did not know)
Anyway after reading the review on this site regarding this lens I decided I would like to save the approx. $1600 AU dollars and try this lens.
I am very picky with the quality of the final image produced by a lens.
Aparently this lens model is made in two places (china and japan)
Mine is made in Japan. (I spoke to a good friend of mine who is a camera and optical repairer...and by the way he is renowned through-out australia for his high grade work) and he has seen lenses come in for repair and commented that where the lens is assemble can make a lot of difference. (eg. screws not been correctly tightened)...anyway I was extremely suprised by the build quality of this lens,,,I was expecting a plastic fantastic for the price I paid, but was amazed at the quality of build of this lens (it is remarkably excellent)
I have tested this lens (from all focal lengths and various f stops) and have found the lens to perform extremely well...to be honest I was astonished !!!
I always use an unsharp mask in photoshop with all my images...(normally around the 120 - 140%) value....a standard practice by pro photographers.
The final images produced are very sharp and are of a satisfactory professional level.
My advice....do not hesitate to buy this lens !!
Focusing is very fast, does not seem to 'hunt', is accurate, and quiet.
I can not say a bad thing about this lens.
Just a wonderful lens
My advice: why paid the $2000 AU dollar price for the nikon brand, this lens perform extremely well.....save yourself some bucks!!!

excellent build quality.
fast, quiet, accurate focusing.
excellent image quality
constant 2.8 apature.
very good for realitivly low light conditions.
excellent zoom range.

none

nikon 35-70 f2.8D
nikon 18-70 AFS
(and many nikon profession grade lenses that do not fall in the zoom range)

Perfect with Canon 400D. I bought this lens together with Canon 400D body as suggested by retailer in Bangkok. Even grabbed sharp images through windshield from a running car due to f2.8. Popular lens among photographers in Thailand. My limited experience suggests that this lens gave me both excellent people and landscape shots. Good for low light shotting. Images are clean even at ISO1600. Great lens in its class both for beginners plus professionals. Quality matches with its price.

-Sharp!Sharp! Very sharp!
-f/2.8 is excellent for low light shooting
-AF is fast

none

-Canon 70-300 IS

It is a very sharp lens, even sharp at F2.8. On the photos taken with this lens at F2.8, I can't tell the sharpness difference from those by my fix focal 50 mm/F1.4 or AF 24 mm/F2.8D prime lens.
The zoom range is most useful. With the wide end at 17 mm, I don't see the urgency to buy another 12-24 lens for my D200.
However, the focus accuracy is not as good on D200 as Nikkor lens. I saw that roughly 20% of pictures take with F2.8 have focus shift. I compared 4 samples at the dealer's shop, and found that they all suffer such problem more or less by about 0.5 to 1 cm. Were it not for the focus problem, it would have beat the 3 times more expensive Nikkor 17-55/F2.8 lens.
The build quality is so so. Maybe it will not survive the heavy usage by a professional journalist, but it is good enough for a consumer using under normal condition.

Sharpness
F2.8 at all focal range
17-50, the most often used zoom range
performance / price winner

Focus inaccuracy when mounted on my D200
Sample to sample variation
built quality

Nikkor AF 24mm/F2.8 D, AF 50 mm/F1.4, AF 24-85/2.8-4 D, AF 80-200/2.8 D, AF28-105/3.5-4.5D, AF-S 18-200/3.5-5.6 VR

none