Tamron 17-50mm problem

[poonpower]

Hi all, just discovered this forum, and JUST purchased a tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon D40. Its pictures are superb, but I find it to perform less than ideal compared to my kit lens. The kit lens is around $100, the Tamron was $400, but it seems to not pick the right place to focus on, and it sometimes hunts for the focus spot. With the kit lens, it was always quick, even though the shutter is signigificantly slower at night.
I am pondering on whether to sell it and keep the kit lens, or sell the kit lens and keep the tamron.

Anyone have the same problems with theirs?

[ziggy53]

Hi all, just discovered this forum, and JUST purchased a tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon D40. Its pictures are superb, but I find it to perform less than ideal compared to my kit lens. The kit lens is around $100, the Tamron was $400, but it seems to not pick the right place to focus on, and it sometimes hunts for the focus spot. With the kit lens, it was always quick, even though the shutter is signigificantly slower at night.
I am pondering on whether to sell it and keep the kit lens, or sell the kit lens and keep the tamron.

Anyone have the same problems with theirs?

PoonPower, welcome to the Digital Grin. :clap

The Tamron 17-50mm, f/2.8 XR Di II with the built-in motor (model A16) is a pretty new beast. I am not sure if much is known about the qualities of the autofocus yet.

Do you have some examples you could post, preferably images with full EXIF intact?

What autofocus mode and technique do you use?

[poonpower]

PoonPower, welcome to the Digital Grin. :clap

The Tamron 17-50mm, f/2.8 XR Di II with the built-in motor (model A16) is a pretty new beast. I am not sure if much is known about the qualities of the autofocus yet.

Do you have some examples you could post, preferably images with full EXIF intact?

What autofocus mode and technique do you use?

hmm, i usually just delete my bad pics, maybe i can take some new ones when i wake up. How do i make it so that the full exif is intact?
I just leave it in AF-S with closest subject. I know it will perform better with Single area focus, but if the kit lens can do it, why not the tamron.
I bought this lens solely for the 2.8, but if its performance is lower than the kit lens, then i might as well return it. The IQ is great when it focuses properly, but so is the kit lens....

[poonpower]

ok, i seem to have a new problem with the lens. I just cant autofocus on the focus points to the sides. It focuses with the middle point everytime, even if i set the autofocus to Closest Subject. With the kit lens this never happened...
I am very confused as to whether to send it back or not.

[MT Stringer]

ok, i seem to have a new problem with the lens. I just cant autofocus on the focus points to the sides. It focuses with the middle point everytime, even if i set the autofocus to Closest Subject. With the kit lens this never happened...
I am very confused as to whether to send it back or not.

I have the same lens, but in Canon mount and it works perfect on a 40D. The AF motor is a little noisy, but it doesn't bother me. Normally, I use the center focus point either in AI focus or AI Servo. I never use the auto focus selection because I want to determine the focus point and not leave it up to the camera to "pick one".
Hope this helps.
Mike

[Miguel Delinquento]

On Pentax user forums, owners of this lens have been complaining about its poor focusing ability. A bunch of front-focus issues, plus the build quality is a little weak considering the cost. When a shot is in focus, it's great.
FYI.

M

[dangin]

i have the tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 for nikon (w/o AF servo). if i'm shooting in really, really dark venues, the lens, like most other lenses, will hunt. i suggest if you're shooting w/ a flash, that you use the AF-assist so that the IR illuminator on the flash helps to find your subject in the darkness.

if possible, try using the lens on another camera, preferrably something w/ more autofocus points. it does make a big difference... my tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 AF is soooo much better on my D3 than on my D200.

[time2smile]

compairing the Tamron to a Nikon.

I have the Tamron 18-200 it does a good job but does not focus as quick or as sharp as the Nikon lenses 24-85 AFS, 70-300 VR . D50 DSLR body.

You can download Nikon ViewNX and it will show you the focus point on your photo, hope it helps.

[bbeck4x4]

Hi all, just discovered this forum, and JUST purchased a tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon D40. Its pictures are superb, but I find it to perform less than ideal compared to my kit lens. The kit lens is around $100, the Tamron was $400, but it seems to not pick the right place to focus on, and it sometimes hunts for the focus spot. With the kit lens, it was always quick, even though the shutter is signigificantly slower at night.
I am pondering on whether to sell it and keep the kit lens, or sell the kit lens and keep the tamron.

Anyone have the same problems with theirs?

I have the version for the Canon, and it is a very sharp lens, in fact most of my shots have been made with this lens, (newest so it's naturally the favorite ) http://photos.planetbeck.com

http://photos.planetbeck.com/photos/313412998_Nve8C-M-4.jpg

I have not experienced the issue with it focusing in the wrong place, at the moment it is focusing faster than my canon lenses, most of those are in the f4 range though.

[osullis]

I borrowed a version of this from my local store (Berger Brothers) and did a close comparison with my kit lens (Canon 18-55 3.5-5.6) on my Canon 30D.

The kit lens was just as good if not slightly better than the tamron. I used a tripod and had many different lighting conditions. I did both autofocus and manual focus. Perhaps my kit lens was a particularly good issue, or the Tamron a not-so-good one. Whatever. I'm saving my money for a Canon lens -- the 24-70 L will come to me after saving my pennies this year, and I won't have lens lust.

SOS

Hi all, just discovered this forum, and JUST purchased a tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon D40. Its pictures are superb, but I find it to perform less than ideal compared to my kit lens. The kit lens is around $100, the Tamron was $400, but it seems to not pick the right place to focus on, and it sometimes hunts for the focus spot. With the kit lens, it was always quick, even though the shutter is signigificantly slower at night.
I am pondering on whether to sell it and keep the kit lens, or sell the kit lens and keep the tamron.

Anyone have the same problems with theirs?

[eyusuf]

Hi all, just discovered this forum, and JUST purchased a tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon D40. Its pictures are superb, but I find it to perform less than ideal compared to my kit lens. The kit lens is around $100, the Tamron was $400, but it seems to not pick the right place to focus on, and it sometimes hunts for the focus spot. With the kit lens, it was always quick, even though the shutter is signigificantly slower at night.
I am pondering on whether to sell it and keep the kit lens, or sell the kit lens and keep the tamron.

Anyone have the same problems with theirs?

1. sample shots would be helpful in determining whether or not the problem comes from the 17-50
2. the same parameters must be used (i.e. tripod, timer, shooting condition, lighting, etc) to have a meaningful comparison between the two lenses

otherwise one may think that it is the operator's error that's causing the problem.

[ziggy53]

I borrowed a version of this from my local store (Berger Brothers) and did a close comparison with my kit lens (Canon 18-55 3.5-5.6) on my Canon 30D.

The kit lens was just as good if not slightly better than the tamron. I used a tripod and had many different lighting conditions. I did both autofocus and manual focus. Perhaps my kit lens was a particularly good issue, or the Tamron a not-so-good one. Whatever. I'm saving my money for a Canon lens -- the 24-70 L will come to me after saving my pennies this year, and I won't have lens lust.

SOS

SOS, welcome to the Digital Grin. :clap

I am astonished to see so many having problems with this lens after seeing so many very good impressions about it when it first came out.

Were you able to preserve any of the sample images? Would it be possible to see them with EXIF if possible?

[osullis]

SOS, welcome to the Digital Grin. :clap

I am astonished to see so many having problems with this lens after seeing so many very good impressions about it when it first came out.

Were you able to preserve any of the sample images? Would it be possible to see them with EXIF if possible?


Sorry so long to respond ....

No, after I was satisfied with the analysis, I trashed all the images. I had a couple hundred ...

I'm not sure I'd say I'm trashing the Tamron, but perhaps it's that the Canon isn't as bad as people think. Gotta get somethin' better is the mantra when it comes to kit lenses. Surely the kit lens is plastic and not weather protected and doesn't have a large aperture, etc. But the glass inside is still designed and manufactured by Canon, which does go some distance.

All that said, my next purchase is a Sigma 120-300 2.8; Canon just doesn't have anything that can match the reach and the aperture -- no one else does either. That's how I'm approaching my lens buying from now on -- what combination of aperture and range will allow me to take the kind of photos I am interested in taking. I was considering the Canon 24-70 2.8 but I stuck a 580 II on my 30 D and by using it properly (bouncing and diffusing) can get good pictures from my kit lens in lower light situations. (At less than half the cost.) If I get serious about lower light indoor flash-free shots I'll get the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

Anyway, that's my evolved thinking at the moment.

SOS