Dear bros in LYN,

Thinking of Tamron AF 17-50mm f2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF].
Do I still need to buy the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II?

Do the Tamron AF 17-50mm f2.8 has the same performance compare to Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II?

Checked @ Photozone. They are about the same @ 50mm. I need some real experience advice.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/ta...50_28/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/ca...50_18/index.htm

Tamron AF 17-50mm f2.8


Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II


Please advise...
Thank You...

This post has been edited by lvyk: Feb 15 2007, 06:00 PM

I believe that both lenses perform well enough in their respective domains.

However, the 50 1.8 is 1 and 1/3 stops faster than the 17-50 2.8 at 50mm.
In extreme low light, the 50mm can do what your 17-50 2.8 cannot do, not to mention the thin DOF you'd get wide open.

As usual, your choice

not just the F stops. how can we compare a prime with a standard zoom lense. diff league nvm. i'll be getting the tamron tomorrow. i'll compare it with my 50mm f1.8. see whats the diff

if im getting the f2.8, i wont be getting the f1.8 prime coz i wont need it
when im "pro" enuf, then maybe i'll need the 1.4

but then again, im non of the above cases, so i got the 50mm prime

Just buy both, that's what I did

not everyone got extra cash lying around

Yup Yup...
Guess better save up more and get Tamrom 17-50mm f2.8 in one shot...

Thank You for the advice every1...

This post has been edited by lvyk: Feb 15 2007, 11:06 PM

Canon 50mm f1.8 is cheap enough ,so I think most people will keep their kit lens and 50mm f1.8 lens in the house as a back up lens if they have other more decent lens.

like me I always bring out 24-85mm F3.5-F4.5 USM and 70-200mm F4L USM only.

I was comparing a 50mm1.8 II and Tamron 17-50 2.8 ( This is a very good copy )
, and below is my opinion :

(1) AF motor is loud with the Tamron ( Well, combine with 20D's mirror slap, you'll add more than percussion to the concert you'd be shooting )

(2) Tamron's AF hesitates (more than the Canon 50mm). And this is using 20D body, with light conditions moderately low to very low, without using AF assist light.

(3) Image quality/sharpness through to corners wise, both are equivalent. ( i know one's a zoom and one's a prime, but to start with , i have to say that the Canon 50mm 1.8 mkII is not an extremely very fantastically sharp lens. I've used the Nikon's 50mm mkII, and i have no problems saying that the nikon one lines up as the sharpest few lenses in the Nikon line-ups ). However, this does not imply that the Tamron is not sharp, in fact , it is very sharp. Mostly probably because the lens produces higher saturated pics than normal.

(4) The most unavoidable factor : white balance. Tamron is uncomfortably too warm for me. I had to use the in-body WB shift chart to correct it, .... that or take care of it later during post-process stage later.

If you are starting with your first lens purchase, one of the factors you'll have to consider would be practicality. 17-50 is very practical (and flexible, takes care of the most common applications). F2.8 + very good sharpness are very nice bonuses to have.

I'd also suggest not much harm in also getting the 50mm 1.8 MkII later on, for few reasons :
- improving your framing skills. Learn to cope with the limitation of the fixed angle of view, force yourself to compose a scene with the limitation.
- capture fast actions in low light
- extra DOF play ... can apply more creativity
- cheap

cheers

i had the tamron 17-50 f2.8 .....had the same proble3m with u, and end up with tamron....anyway with our low noise, just boost up the iso to 800 or 1600 during low light and it settles most of it....sumore u get zoom (some times u realize u need it)..............so go with tamron........unless u really goin for portrait then 50mm would be best......(i see this tamron as a more "general" lens.)

i think the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II is the best lense for the price i paid.

In addition as scotty said, different league. You might want to try it out before you buy it.

Of course, it also depends on wat you plan to shoot with the lense and wat result ur expecting.

if u have the 17-50mm f/2.8
u can sell the 50mm edy
unless u really need to go to f/1.8

i oso plan to buy both lens together ......

okie here are the comparison shots i've made last night. my cam was mounted on a tripod. normal lighting. auto white balance. both on same setting. i only did some resizing only. no other than that both picture was taken on aperture priority mode

nikkor 50mm f1.8 at f2.8

tamron 17-50mm f2.8 at f2.8

nikkor still has better colors

why's the tamron so greenish? something looks off.

another two shots made just now. this time on full manual mode.

tamron 17-50 f2.8 @ 1/8th of a second on 50mm F2.8



nikkor 50mm f1.8 @ 1/6th of a second on 50mm f2.8

second try is much better, something is just wrong with the first set....the tamron is suppose to be a little warmer....but those pix looks greenish. the 100 bucks prime is still a little sharper

I'd walk around with the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8. F1.8 is too shallow unless subjects are far away.

...why not Canon 17-55mm F2.8 with IS, I wonder?

'sides you can do ISO6400 on your Canon by shooting at ISO3200 with -1 EV and boosting it back in Photoshop.

Also, when budget permits, go for the Canon 50mm F1.4 with USM and full-time manual focus! Even at F1.8 the F1.4 should be sharper. (Only exception being the Nikkors.)

Anybody got a Sigma 20mm F1.8 to throw into the confusion?

On a side note, I have reassembled a Canon 50mm F1.8 Mk II that had its front element pop off. Not very reassuring. (Though, after reattaching it seems solid.)

I agree that Tamron's color is warmer than Canon.
As for the noise, yes it is noisier than Canon 50mm f1.8.

Both pictures below are taken from a stationary tripod. I did not move the tripod. It appears that at 50mm setting, Tamron looks like it is shorter than Canon.

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 @ 1/13th of a second on 50mm F2.8 (resized)


Canon 50mm f1.8 Mark II @ 1/13th of a second on 50mm f2.8 (resized)


From above, it can be seen that Canon produces a better bokeh than Tamron at the same aperture. Also, when the Tamron is fully open at f2.8, vignetting can be seen at the corners.

The 100% crop of them are shown below.

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 @ 1/13th of a second on 50mm F2.8 (100% crop)


Canon 50mm f1.8 Mark II @ 1/13th of a second on 50mm f2.8 (100% crop)


The Canon's bokeh is much softer and pleasing.

This post has been edited by donnyyeo: Feb 20 2007, 08:59 PM