ramon_v__california_ Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 has anybody tried this lens? i'm just thinking of having a lighter/less expensive version of my nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 for a light, walk-around lens. for this purpose, i'm using right now the 18-70mm kit lens and a nikkor 20mm in one of my vest pockets. sometimes, they switch places. i might as well ask about the sigma 10-20mm. i ordered this one for my tight indoor shoots but delivery date has been moved to a later date twice already.don't really have much choice since the tokina 12-24mm is still out of sight.have literally been just trying to press my back to the wall with my 17-55mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mawz Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 Check out Tamron's new 17-50, from what I'm seeing, the consensus is that the 17-50 is just as good a lens as the 28-75, which is superb. And it's small and light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelschrag Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 Another vote for the Tamron 17-50mm. I posted a couple of reviews but got some not-so-thoughtful responses. Here they are again, along with one from Bob Atkins: http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1750_28/index.htm http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=18754749 http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_17-50_review.html The Tamron 17-50mm is $450, if you get one please let us know how you like it in comparison to the Nikkor 17-55mm. I think a lot of us would be interested in a lighter version of the 17-55mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliff_gallup Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 Aside from the extra speed, how does it compare with the 18-70mm Nikkor kit lens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelschrag Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 Cliff - hard to tell since this is such a new lens. There is not much info out there currently. If you trust photozone, however, the 2 lenses are similar stopped down. At short focal lengths the Tamron has the edge in sharpness wide open f2.8 vs. f3.5-3.8 for the Nikon. However, Ramon seems to be looking for f2.8 glass. I have the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 for my D200, but I am intrigued with the new Tamron to possibly go on a 20D. Fast, good performance and relatively cheap. If I did not have the 17-55mm f2.8 already I'd look at this lens for the D200, since the D200ﾒs performance at higher ISO is not the greatest. If its only ~$100 more than the kit lens, seems like a no-brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvarko Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 I've got the Sigma. It's got a little bit of chromatic abberation, but the lens is appealingly small and light. The Tamron's a lot bigger and sturdier-looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramon_v__california_ Posted June 14, 2006 Author Share Posted June 14, 2006 thanks, guys. i'll check out the tamron. the more-sturdier-look factor is worth checking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now