Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Through-the-Lens Club' started by jmg, Mar 16, 2007.
Hey, all--I'm getting a D200 next week. Any opinions on Tamron's 17-55 f2.8?
DON'T! Bear in mind that no matter how good a DSLR you'll get, it's practically worthless if you use an aftermarket lens. In my 30-year experience, having handled a multitude of cameras and lenses, I have never seen an aftermarket lens that's even close to being "good enough". Often, the most attractive thing about an aftermarket lens is its price but in the long run, these lenses tend to fog-out faster and fail to activate certain camera functions like multi-segment metering and focusing so what you save on cost, you pay for dearly in image quality and reliability. You can get consumer type dedicated lenses at the same cost but they will always be sharper and perform better with your camera than an aftermarket lens that costs half the price.
For the purpose of this post, I will assume that you are actually referring to the Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD. If you read opinions on dpreview.com and fredmiranda.com, you will find that many consider that lens to be quite excellent IF you get a good copy.
Check it here:
oops.. too late.
Bought the D200, the Tamron, and the MB-200 on Monday--went out of town with it wed. I'll get a CF reader next week and post pics from it.
I haven't tried it with my Nikon 28-80 or ikon 70-300 G lenses, or my Tamron 28-105 f2.8 yet. As far as the D200 itself?
man, what a nice rig!
I'll probably pick up a 50mm f1.8 later in the summer, after my credit card cools off some
I'm using Canon, so just talking out my @$$ here, but all the reviews i've read of the Canon mount Tammy 17-50 2.8 says it's sharper than the Sigma equivalent and for the money, it's a REALLY nice kit lens/walk-around lens replacement. YMMV w/ Nikon stuff though. Congrats on the new rig though!