Tamron 17-50 2.8

[peter_cofran]

<p>I currently have 3 primes and 1 zoom for my Nikon D300 and backup D80.<br>

35 2.8, 50 1.8, 85 1.8<br>

18-70 3.5-4.5 AF-S G Nikon</p>

<p>I have a wedding coming up and was thinking of upgrading my zoom to a Tamron 17-50 2.8. My question is this lens much of an improvement over my current zoom? I know I'll be losing tele reach but will have a brighter view finder and fixed aperture. How would the focus accuracy compare? Tamron makes 28-70 but I feel its not wide enough for reception work. I also don't have the money for the Nikon 17-55, I don't do enough weddings to justify its cost even though I've read its a fine piece of glass.</p>

<p>In the past I've used 35 as they come up the aisle and when they leave, and 85 for the ceremony, then the zoom for the reception and group shots. Anyone see any logic getting the Tamron 17-50 or is it unnecessary? I know its subjective... I also don't know what the church is it yet but I can safely assume poorly light with no flash during the ceremony.</p>

 

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>I would certainly reco the Tamron over the Nikon you currently have.</p>

<p>I would also reco getting a longer VR lens for ceremony work. even the 55-200.</p>

[ferdi_s]

<p>Tamron 2.8 is a great zoom lens for wedding if you cannot afford the nikkor. It's faster than your zoom lens and will come handy in low light situation. If that's what you mean by improvement, then yes. I don't know about image quality of 18-70 AF-S so I cannot comment on the IQ comparison.</p>

[kevin_swan1]

<p>In wedding photography, it's all about the aperture. So in that sense, it would definitely be worth the upgrade. You won't miss the tele reach, trust me. Ideally, I'd move up to the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8. If that's not in the budget, then I'd look at renting it for the wedding. If that's still not possible, then I'd advise the upgrade to the Tamron. It's still a huge upgrade from what you've currently got.</p>

[peter_cofran]

<p>Thx for the input. I'm reconsidering the Nikon 17-55mm, I saw it can be had for around $800 used on ebay. Maybe my friend might let me borrow his 80-200mm.</p>

[james_calron]

<p>Yes, yes yes. Tamron 17-50mm is a great lens. I had it for a long time and used it for multiple weddings when I had the D300. Now I use a D700 and Tamron 28-75mm (though not quite as good as the 17-50mm in my opinion). But it will be leaps and bounds over your 18-70mm nikon. Being able to stop down to 2.8 is a must for wedding ceremonies (if not a 50mm f/1.8 or 85mm f/1.8 or 1.4). Good luck with your wedding(s)!</p>

[tim_dalton]

<p>I have both the Nikon 18-70 & the Tamron 17-50. I've only used either for a few weddings. After the last wedding I just did (which was with the Tamron), I put the Nikon 18-70 back on my camera after frustration of the Tamron's slow or inability to focus in low light. I may change my mind on this but the Nikon 18-70 is a very good lens. The Tamron is a better lens except for focusing. That's my only complaint with the Tamron but I wish I had purchased the Nikon 17-55 lens.</p>

[ken_kartes]

<p>I have both as well, no issue with the Tamron hunting at all. It is a tad slower on focusing but better in low light for me. I do miss the longer range.</p>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>I should add that I use a Tokina 16-50/2.8 and love its rendition of people/skin.</p>

<p>I had the Tamron with Canon setup, but agree with Tim that it is slower to focus. I find the Tokina to be about middle between the Tamron and Nikon. The reason I use it is the size/weight, optics, build and overall quality/range. It is between the Tamron and Nikon in price, but equal to the Nikon in build and accuracy. It is bigger than the Tamron and smaller/lighter than the Nikon. The nikon optics are crisper, but only slightly, while the Tamron and Tokina are about equal other than the way they render skin/highlights.</p>

<p>I have three Tokina lenses that I love, even with a slightly slower focus. For comparrison, I alos have the Nikkor 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 lenses. I still prefer the Tokinas overall.</p>

[peter_cofran]

<p> I found a local place to rent the Nikon 17-55mm for $37 for 3-days. I'm going to go with that until I have a volume of shoots to justify a purchase. Thx for the all the ideas.</p>

[sherijohnson]

<p>I have one of these lenses for my Canon and it is getting a LOT of use.</p>

[brandtdelorenzo]

<p>Tokina also makes a 16-50mm F/2.8 lens...Tokina seems to be a tad more consistent as far as quality - all of their lenses are solid and reasonably priced, but just slightly edged out by Canon/Nikon glass.</p>

[Brad_]

<p>I use the Tamron 17-50 extensively for street portraits - it's my favorite lens...</p>