Tamron Sony AF17-50mm F/2.8 Di-II LD Lens Mini Review

[dr4gon]

Tamron (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/1750_diII_a016.asp) Sony AF17-50mm F/2.8 Di-II LD Lens Mini Review

These are all I got now. The sony pictures were taken first and the Tamron was taken second (about 6-7 minutes apart). And it was in the early evening/late afternoon, so it was getting a little bit darker so those are the differences you see.

The lens itself is very nice. It is quite weighty (almost the same as my Tamron 70-300mm) but feels solid especially compared with the sony kit lens which is made of cheap plastic and is very light, almost too light, like a toy.

The lens focuses very fast and has a nice aperture allowing for a "faster" aperture. I really like having more aperture values to play when shooting in "A" mode.

The lens comes with as you would expect, both caps but also a bayonet style hood (unlike the plain cone one that came with my Tamron 70-300mm), so it looks real pro! :D. For the money, it should probably come with a case :p.

On to the results,

Cropped from this:

http://www.dr4gon.net/lens/brickscene.jpg

http://www.dr4gon.net/lens/f8/sony.jpg - http://www.dr4gon.net/lens/f8/tamron.jpg

http://www.dr4gon.net/lens/f8/sony.jpg - http://www.dr4gon.net/lens/f11/tamron.jpg

EXIF:

Camera Make: SONY
Camera Model: DSLR-A300
Image Date: 2008:07:01 19:15:42
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 35.0mm (35mm equivalent: 52mm)
Exposure Time: 0.040 s (1/25)
Aperture: f/11.0
ISO equiv: 100
White Balance: Auto
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual


As you can see, the Tamron lens is clearly much sharper and crisp on the edges whereas the Sony is a bit blurred and has a ton of purple fringing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_fringe).

I will continue to update this review when I have a chance to do it again and get better more consistent (time of day) results and a more interesting subject). And I will try to get something in the middle and at f/5.6 (sony minimum aperture), f/8 and f/11.

Any comments and suggestions are welcome.

[DonSchap]

I am wondering ...

Was there something you did not find on this (DCRP) and other websites that led you to producing this review? The 17-50mm f/2.8 is not really all that new, anymore. It came out in April 2006 (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19872&highlight=TAMRON+17-50mm) (<- Click on this link for personal review & thread) and I guess it would be hoped that enough crosstalk has gone on about the significant advantages of this lens over the SONY DT 18-70 that further comparison would be, well ... no longer necessary.

Believe me, I was pretty "steamed" when I got the A100K kit (July 2006) ... with that DT 18-70 lens. I immediately conducted a series of tests ... and quickly relegated that particular lens to "the shelf", which is where lenses I feel no longer produce quality images for me go (Integrity precludes me from sticking someone else with that kind of low level image quality ... so I'll eat it.) I wound up going with my two older Tokina 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 & Minolta 35-70mm f/4, until I purchased the TAMRON SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) SONY-mount, to seal the deal.

This landscape was among one of the first images I took with the 17-50 ... to prove linearity @ 17mm

37708


Although this lens was mounted on my EOS 20D, at the time, it proved to be a truly nice and sharp lens ... similar to its earlier brother, the TAMRON SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) The original image has been archived, so doing a 100% would be a bit difficult. There may be something in the above link, on pages 4 or 5, to the earlier review, that shows some cropped close-ups.

If you had not gone with the 17-50, even the TAMRON AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3XR Di-II LD ASpherical (IF) offers better aspects to your images, than that kit lens. In fact, it does so much that I keep the newer 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 continuously mounted on my A100 as the "grab & go" camera, because I know I can get a very reasonable shot with it. I really cannot say that based on the quality that the SONY DT 18-70 produces.

[dr4gon]

Yeah, now that I have 2 lenses, I sometimes struggle over which to use. But the 17-50 has a nice aperture. And 300mm provides a little extra over 250mm (but obviously the quality isn't as good as the DI-II lens). But all in all 17-50mm makes a good "walk around lens" for most (well, many) applications.

I just made this because I got scared after reading reports (http://www.alphamountworld.com/forums/sony-digital-slr-talk/tamron-17-50-f28-did-i-get-bad-copy/2008-5/718)of people getting a bad lens (very bad blurring) and it wasn't cheap so I wanted to see if mine was really up to par, and yeah, it looks like it is :D. And 2 I thought people here would like to read more about it if they are on the fence. Actually the only reason I got it was because I got it at a good price (~$300) and it's done really well so far.

lol I thought this thread was lost forever!

Just found this review posted yesterday: http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/47-sony-alpha-aps-c/386-tamron_1750_28_sony?start=2

[DonSchap]

I kind of figured it was something along those lines.

Fact is ... the 17-50mm is a pretty darn good lens on the SONY DSLRs. I think it should be offered as the real lens choice for most beginners. The SONY DT 18-70 is so bad I'm surprised people don't wind up returning it.

But, hey, that's just me.

Nice use of the 17-50 ... have fun with it. ;)

[dr4gon]

I kind of figured it was something along those lines.

Fact is ... the 17-50mm is a pretty darn good lens on the SONY DSLRs. I think it should be offered as the real lens choice for most beginners. The SONY DT 18-70 is so bad I'm surprised people don't wind up returning it.

But, hey, that's just me.

Nice use of the 17-50 ... have fun with it. ;)

Well I got the a300 for $599 + tax at Circuit City with the kit lens and a 75-300mm Sony DT lens. I sold the zoom lens and got the Tamron 70-300 and the kit lens will be on the shelf for a while and probably be sold with the camera whenever I move on.

I am amazed (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39912) at the 17-50 though, it's a good replacement and am glad you recommended it. f/2.8 is very useful!

[DonSchap]

I got this recent shot in Colorado with it ... and this is what makes it all worthwhile.

37716

^-- Blowing it up ... it's sharp enough to pick up this "dude" climbing on it. :eek:

37717


This is exactly why I like it. It delivers.

[Visual Reality]

Did you get the one with the motor (new) or the one without (old)?

[dr4gon]

wow that's really cool. what aperture is that?

visual, what motor are you talking about? the AF?

[DonSchap]

EXIF info:
Focal Length: 35mm
Aperture: f/8
Exposure Time: 1/1500
ISO-800
Spot Metering
Manual

I know this seems a bit extreme, but I wanted a very crisp look to the shot ... and got it.

[dr4gon]

Did you not have a tripod (ISO-800?) at the time? It's a very cool shot though. You're always finding little hidden things in your pictures :p (bald eagle hiding in the trees)

[DonSchap]

At 1/1500th second, I could have been jumping off a bridge and still "got the shot." :D

No, no tripod. This was a handheld trip ... the sling bag stuffed with three lenses and my external flash. Airline travel has become an absolute nightmare for hauling gear around with you. I pity people who rely upon it.

Maybe "localized" gear rental (tripods, lenses, etc.) will improve because of this silly overkill on security. I know I'm just having to do without tools, accessories and extra equipment. Why not just wall the entire country off and be done with it? Oh yeah, that's go on down south, isn't it? My bad. :(

[dr4gon]

lol, it sure is. but bad people will always find their way through :rolleyes:

[Visual Reality]

Yes, the AF motor. There are 2 versions of the lens.

[dr4gon]

Didn't know that. But like I said the AF is very fast and accurate. So yeah, it's got the AF :D

[Visual Reality]

No...let me explain.

The lens was originally designed without an autofocus motor. This means it will not AF on the Nikon D40/D60 cameras. It uses the internal motor of cameras which is fast, but loud.

The new version has its own focus motor which means it will work on the Nikon D40/D60 cameras. Tamron also added an AF/MF switch on the lens and fixed their focus accuracy issues. The focus is slower, but much quieter.

If your lens has the AF/MF switch, it is the new version. I have the new lens and while it is great, I really wish it did better in poor lighting. It really has trouble focusing sometimes where Canon/Nikon lenses don't have any trouble at all.

[dr4gon]

Hmm, how new are we talking? All the Sony lenses I've ever seen don't have an AF/MF switch on the lens since it's right on the body. Should I be concerned (try to get a newer one?) Will it be faster? I did notice it didn't match the one pictured online, but assumed that since mine was a sony alpha mount that it was just different.

[DonSchap]

I'm not so sure TAMRON added anything to the other mounts. It probably is ONLY the "N" model numbers, such as Model # A18N AF 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) Nikon-Mount

or

Model # A16N AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) Nikon-Mount

[Visual Reality]

Don is probably right. I wouldn't be concerned though, and no the newer model is slower to focus. You might want to test focus accuracy though.

[dr4gon]

What's the best way to test that?

Thanks guys :)