Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 vs Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR

[Daijoubu]

I got the D40 not long ago and changed the kit lens with the D60's one with VR

Now I'm wondering if it's worth paying 240$ (assuming I can sell my lens for 150$) for a constant 2.8 aperture across the zoom range

I know VR can help hand shake up to 1-3 stops but doesn't stop subject motion blur that a faster lens can

If i understand correctly, 2.8 is 2 stops faster than 5.6 (at 55mm), now VR can help shoot at 2 stops lower

Does that mean shooting with a tripod, the tamron wins, shooting handheld with shaky hands, there's little difference?

[Kasakato]

VR can never replace a fast lens. Realistically, the Tamron and Nikon cannot be compared. One is "pro"; the other is consumer. Fast glass allows for shots VR does not. VR works upto a point. Want to stop motion? VR dosent. Want to shoot at a weird, akward angle? Good luck getting VR to help.
Each lens has its disadvantages and advantages. The Nikon lens focuses quickly, quietly, and is tact sharp. The Tamron focuses slowly, is noisy, and you have to get the BIM version for the D40. I recently bought the Tamron and really like it. Its excellent for low light stuff, ie New Years downtown. For example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3101/3159341042_581b553ebb.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3084/3158551969_b086516683.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3202/3159439030_0c1d523c8a.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/3159387626_74d912ff5b.jpg?v=0

[djmr2]

plus tamron doesn't make a 18-50 2.8 :P

[majic]

After looking at Kasakato's pictures in an earlier thread I started to wonder the same thing... now this thread.. perfect :)

I did the same as you: bought the D40, sold the kit lens and bought the 18-55VR.. now I am also looking to 'upgrade' the VR lens to the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 if the price is right..

where can you get it for $390?? is that used? gray market? full warranty?

[Kasakato]

After looking at Kasakato's pictures in an earlier thread I started to wonder the same thing... now this thread.. perfect :)

I did the same as you: bought the D40, sold the kit lens and bought the 18-55VR.. now I am also looking to 'upgrade' the VR lens to the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 if the price is right..

where can you get it for $390?? is that used? gray market? full warranty?

I got mine for $300. :D I bought it used off Creig. It was the original made in Japan version free of any defects. It does however front focus 2-4mm at 17mm. No warranty was included, but its cheap enough that if it breaks, Im buying another. Take a look at Kijiji and Creig, I see a few BIM lenses go up every week.

[elty]

is 390 + tax for a new one (w/ warranty) a good deal?

[Kasakato]

is 390 + tax for a new one (w/ warranty) a good deal?

Excellent deal, be sure its the BIM version, and its sharp.

[Daijoubu]

plus tamron doesn't make a 18-50 2.8 :P

17-50mm, oops :p

where can you get it for $390?? is that used? gray market? full warranty?

From eBay canadian seller prodigital2000

[goofball]

It was the original made in Japan version free of any defects. It does however front focus 2-4mm at 17mm.

:confused:

They are different lenses, the only thing they have in common is the focal length really (except for the 1mm at the wider end and the 5mm on the telephoto end).

The Tamron is heavier, uses larger filter, and doesn't have a sonic motor (the built-in motor Tamron is not sonic). Truth is, the Nikon doesn't have a "true" sonic motor but it does focus quieter and faster.

Both serve their purposes. Don't forget that for certain things, VR is better than f/2.8. For others (DOF control), the f/2.8 allows for more flexibility.

The Nikon front element rotates during focusing, the Tamron does not.

The Nikon doesn't have a "true" focus ring, you are essentially grabbing the front element ring and turning it for focus.

I've found the Nikon focuses closer for better closeup (I wouldn't call it macro) pictures.

If you want a true sonic motor alternative that wont' murder your bank account, look at the Sigma 18-50 HSM f/2.8.

[Kasakato]

:confused:

They are different lenses, the only thing they have in common is the focal length really (except for the 1mm at the wider end and the 5mm on the telephoto end).

The Tamron is heavier, uses larger filter, and doesn't have a sonic motor (the built-in motor Tamron is not sonic). Truth is, the Nikon doesn't have a "true" sonic motor but it does focus quieter and faster.

Both serve their purposes. Don't forget that for certain things, VR is better than f/2.8. For others (DOF control), the f/2.8 allows for more flexibility.

The Nikon front element rotates during focusing, the Tamron does not.

The Nikon doesn't have a "true" focus ring, you are essentially grabbing the front element ring and turning it for focus.

I've found the Nikon focuses closer for better closeup (I wouldn't call it macro) pictures.

If you want a true sonic motor alternative that wont' murder your bank account, look at the Sigma 18-50 HSM f/2.8.
The quote you quoted was in reference to the Tamron. You have me confused.

[goofball]

The quote you quoted was in reference to the Tamron. You have me confused.

Yes, my bad. I wasn't quite understanding how you say it is free of defects, and then mention how it front-focuses at the widest end.

The rest of the post is what I have found in comparing the 2 lenses.

[vincent-poon]

I've got the exact combo you planning to get, D40 + tamrom 17-50 2.8

make sure you test out the lens in person first, cus a lot of them are defective with the focus.
theres a focus test sheet somewhere online, i forget where though.

[goofball]

make sure you test out the lens in person first, cus a lot of them are defective with the focus.

Unless you're Kasakato who has a defect free lens with front focusing only at 17mm :lol:

[Kasakato]

Unless you're Kasakato who has a defect free lens with front focusing only at 17mm :lol:

Absolutely, its been well documented this lens has issues. Most lenses with problems have been made in China, Tamron started production in Japan, moved it to China, and now it appears to be back in Japan. Issues with FF/BF, and flash sync in iTTL-BL mode are pretty common.

[goofball]

Absolutely, its been well documented this lens has issues. Most lenses with problems have been made in China, Tamron started production in Japan, moved it to China, and now it appears to be back in Japan. Issues with FF/BF, and flash sync in iTTL-BL mode are pretty common.

I wouldn't call a lens that misfocuses a "defect-free" lens, that's just my opinion though.

I'm fully aware of the Tamron issues.

[Kasakato]

I wouldn't call a lens that misfocuses a "defect-free" lens, that's just my opinion though.

I'm fully aware of the Tamron issues.

O, I see, fair enough. Semi-defect free. :lol:

[goofball]

O, I see, fair enough. Semi-defect free. :lol:

Do they have MIC with BIM's? Mine is not the model with BIM.

It's not really a flash sync problem, it's more of an issue with not having the proper distance info being sent to the flash unit for proper compensation. Perhaps flash sync has a different meaning for you than it does for me?

[Kasakato]

Do they have MIC with BIM's? Mine is not the model with BIM.

It's not really a flash sync problem, it's more of an issue with not having the proper distance info being sent to the flash unit for proper compensation. Perhaps flash sync has a different meaning for you than it does for me?

Yes, I believe they have MIC with BIMs. They were the models with the most problems.

Flash sync, at least in my head, refers to the body sending the correct info to the flash for proper exposure, over iTTL.

[goofball]

Yes, I believe they have MIC with BIMs. They were the models with the most problems.

Interesting to note. The Sigma 18-50 HSM would be a better option than the Tamron if it wasn't so much more expensive.

[dracore]

VR can never replace a fast lens. Realistically, the Tamron and Nikon cannot be compared. One is "pro"; the other is consumer. Fast glass allows for shots VR does not. VR works upto a point. Want to stop motion? VR dosent. Want to shoot at a weird, akward angle? Good luck getting VR to help.
Each lens has its disadvantages and advantages. The Nikon lens focuses quickly, quietly, and is tact sharp. The Tamron focuses slowly, is noisy, and you have to get the BIM version for the D40. I recently bought the Tamron and really like it. Its excellent for low light stuff, ie New Years downtown. For example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3101/3159341042_581b553ebb.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3084/3158551969_b086516683.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3202/3159439030_0c1d523c8a.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/3159387626_74d912ff5b.jpg?v=0


Did you need to use the flash with the tamron? It doesn't appear that you did... or did you just open up the aperture real wide?

[Kasakato]

Did you need to use the flash with the tamron? It doesn't appear that you did... or did you just open up the aperture real wide?

The stage was maybe 30-40' ahead of me, a flash wouldn't have done much. Shooting at f/2.8 and a relatively fast shutter speed did the trick.

[djmr2]

Interesting to note. The Sigma 18-50 HSM would be a better option than the Tamron if it wasn't so much more expensive.

the only thing better of the sigma is the HSM motor. Optically the TAMRON is much much better.

[rename]

VR can never replace a fast lens. Realistically, the Tamron and Nikon cannot be compared. One is "pro"; the other is consumer. Fast glass allows for shots VR does not. VR works upto a point. Want to stop motion? VR dosent. Want to shoot at a weird, akward angle? Good luck getting VR to help.
Each lens has its disadvantages and advantages. The Nikon lens focuses quickly, quietly, and is tact sharp. The Tamron focuses slowly, is noisy, and you have to get the BIM version for the D40. I recently bought the Tamron and really like it. Its excellent for low light stuff, ie New Years downtown. For example:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3101/3159341042_581b553ebb.jpg?v=0


Kasakato, said everything i was going to say.
I'd def go for Tamron, which I have one already and very happy with it.
although I didnt try 18-55mm VR s I cannot really compare personal opinion "in use"

btw, I have the same shot as you have in here, only in converted to sepia.
and slightly tilted for get the pole in different position and I used tripod for a longer exposure.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/61/214800302_9ce0349957.jpg

[rename]

Interesting to note. The Sigma 18-50 HSM would be a better option than the Tamron if it wasn't so much more expensive.

I was in the same dilemma when I was buying Tamron. I tried both lenses in the store (Aden camera) and went home with the images to compare.
I liked the crispiness on the Tamron a lot. then I started to read a bit more about Tamron. a lot of people had thee same opinion about the sharpness about it.

Sigma's HSM is very nice, however looks a bit cheaper built then Tamron.

[Kasakato]

Kasakato, said everything i was going to say.
I'd def go for Tamron, which I have one already and very happy with it.
although I didnt try 18-55mm VR s I cannot really compare personal opinion "in use"

btw, I have the same shot as you have in here, only in converted to sepia.
and slightly tilted for get the pole in different position and I used tripod for a longer exposure.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/61/214800302_9ce0349957.jpg
Great mind thinks alike. :razz: I like the angle on yours. Tripod, handheld?

[rename]

Great mind thinks alike. :razz: I like the angle on yours. Tripod, handheld?

:)

its with the tripod, i had it ready and felt like I dont want to hurt my neck, so put it on and exposed for 30 sec @ f/11