JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
The Tamron SP 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD is a standard lens for APS-C, manufactured from 2008. The focus is done by Lens AF motor (non-ultrasonic), it does not have image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 315 €;
158 users have given it an average vote of 8.8 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Canon EF: this lens is compatible with reflex APS-C Canon EF.
Nikon F: this lens is compatible with reflex APS-C Nikon.
Sony A-mount: this lens is compatible with reflex APS-C Sony A-mount.
Pentax: this lens is compatible with reflex APS-C Pentax.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 201000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
Pros: Unbelievable value for money, Sharpness and contrast, f32 minimum aperture, relatively small 67mm filters, quite close focus
Cons: Jerky zoom action, plasticky, general handling, AF, lightness (possibly)
Opinion: I wasn't going to write a review as there are already so many written. Firstly, I don't much like this lens, in use, but I DO like very much its image quality and I was almost forced into buying it, needing a very cheap fast standard zoom for low-light music and performance photography for my D7000. It needed to be not obviously soft at edges at f2.8 (Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 is) and be able to perform well wide open at all focal lengths. From f4 to f11, the sharpness is the equal to any zoom I've used (inc pro Nikkors) and is very satisfying for landscapes in low light. I also use a Nikkor 16-85mm VR for landscapes which also has great image quality in a well built unit that's nice to use and with VR also. But it's obviously not great in low light and when zoomed out. However, after nearly two years with the Tamron and some beautiful sharp images that rank among my best, I keep looking at reviews of other lenses. . My big hands yearn for a lens more substantial than the 400g Tamron and the sticky zoom irritates me often. Having to disconnect AF on both lens AND camera to override the AF is a pain too. The benchmark Nikkor 17-55mm was designed over a decade ago and its weight and build is just too much for practicality and while used prices have dropped hugely now, it is still too expensive for me and there are some real rogue ex-pro battered examples out there. The Sigma, as I said is an attractive proposition, weight, size, OS and price but whilst apparently being optically excellent from f4, on, it's still variable at wide open. The better built newer, with VC, Tamron seems to have suffered an overall loss in absolute quality - Tamron still offer the older lens under review in their current line-up, so even they acknowledge that the quality is better here than the newer one. I'm now considering the used only Tokina 16-50mm f2.8. Substantial and well made but not quite up to the over-the-top Nikkor and at a reasonable price for a good one. Tests I've seen show a reduced edge resolution at f2.8, which is to be expected but unlike those Sigma's, not a soft edge. And mid aperture it looks to be on par with anything else. So, my review is really for the whole fast standard zoom genre and how small the actual choice is, when it would seem to offer many. Score, for this Tamron, Price and image quality;10, handling; 6, overall 8
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Fantastic in backlights; sharp; internal focus; compact (for an f2.8)
Cons:Is missing; construction not impeccable; limited to 50mm; Af noisy.
Opinion:I had for several years this optics (sold only when I changed system). It was the most used lens in my kit. To be a fixed 2.8 zoom is quite compact. The quality of the image has always satisfied me, especially in the backlights where it has always been very resistant to flares and very contrasted. The construction was not flawless (the filter carrier loosened and I had to redo it; the rubber part of the zoom was not fixed perfectly), but in substance it never gave me any problems. Sure, is missing, but I've never regretted its lack too much since the VERSION with IS is bigger (and, from reviews I've read, even less sharp).
Cons:considering the price none, maybe the ring a little hard
Opinion:Great when it needs brightness. Perfect for ceremonies, photos in Churches, interiors, parties. At the edges a little soft? I'd say all the light ing objects are a bit soft at the edges. Isn't it defined as a fixed? It's true, but do we always care about this whole definition or is it just mental masturbation? Of course, if you need it to print posters or murals it's not good. But for prints up to 30x40, videate and social is indistinguishable from the original Nikon 17-55. For photo amateurs a must. Recommended
Pros:Sharp, I use it on a Canon 7D. Very fast focus, great colors, lightness; Price.
Cons:Nobody. I have owned it for ten years and, I try to keep it very well, given the non-extended excursion does not pump in itself too much dust but inside is still very clean.
Opinion:Since 2009 I use it on a Canon 7D. I have to talk about it absolutely well. With that I did at the amateur level all the photographs of the family ; weddings, baptisms and by all accounts were excellent. On the occasion of the events they always tell me "I recommend bring the camera". A lens that in the use "does not make you feel any problem". Especially in winter with little light I often use it for shots in the city and on the Riviera, it has always given excellent results. At the time of the purchase I did not want to spend much even though I risked having a lens not too high ; I had taken yes of advice around but little to do , an object is judged when it is yours and you use it for some time and on various occasions as it should : It certainly will not have the same characteristics as the analogue Canon - much more expensive - but I have absolutely no regrets ; go back I would definitely buy it back.
Opinion:I had for a few months this excellent lens that I changed only for the matter of convenience at the focal level opting for a sigma 17-70C. Combined with my Canon 100D, it churned out crisp rows, nothing to do with the 18-55STM Canon which, in my opinion, had more saturated and pleasant hair colors. The lens is an excellent and inexpensive upgrade of the aforementioned 18-55, the only flaw that I found in my specimen a build quality not quite at the top (various crunches and dial zoom not fluid) that however does not absolutely affect the final result . If you do not need stabilization i recommend it also for its brightness being 2.8 on the whole focal, otherwise there is always the stabilized version that in many say be less sharp than this.
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
