Tamron SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD IF Lens Sample Photos and Specifications

photo sharing and upload

picture albums

photo forums

search pictures

popular photos

photography help

login

All Cameras >> Tamron >> Tamron SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD IF

Tamron SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD IF Lens Sample Photos

u42/equipment/upload/33457271.1735mm.gif

Marketed: 12-Feb-2004

Lens: 17-35mm

Random Tamron SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD IF Samples from 3001 available Photos more

Comments

cheungyiuchung		28-May-2009 01:59
It is a great lens with rich color. I bought it last year in HKD 2,350, which is less expensive than 1/2 of Canon 17-40. I compared two lens apple to apple in the camera shop, I did not find any significant difference in image quality. I used it as my walk around lens in my 450D. The picture quality is 100% satisfied my expectation. I recently upgraded to 50D, this lens work very much than before. Perhaps it comes from the difference bewteen 50D and 450D. I really enjoy using the lens. Years or later when I upgrade to 5D or above, this lens surely can bring me Ultra Wide Angle photography fun

Bob Reynolds		09-Jun-2008 20:58
An outstanding wide angle lens for the price. Terrific sharpness and contrast throughout it's range. The color is also excellent, although it tends to be a bit warm like other Tamron lenses. Here are a few samples from this lens using the Canon XT: http://www.pbase.com/olybob/image/93791931 http://www.pbase.com/olybob/image/93577492 http://www.pbase.com/olybob/image/93793156

Guest		25-Sep-2007 00:32
I have no remarks whatsoever. The Canon 16-35L is supposed to be a tad sharper wide open, but since I never use it wide open anyway, There's nothing to complain about. Detail is excellent, contrast and color are more than okay as well. Barrel distortion is present, but not annoyingly. Highly recommended if you don't have the dough to buy the 16-35L. The difference in price is not justified anyway, if you ask me.

Thomas on Islands		28-Jan-2007 22:19
I looked into getting a lighter 17-35mm for my both film and digital Nikon. Based on my good impression of the 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di and good tests, I ended up getting this Tamron. It comes at a mere 1/3 price of the genuine 17-35 f/2.8 AFS Nikkor. Housing of this lens is made of plastics, what might be a sacrilege for all metal tubes fanatics, but I personally disagree and enjoy rather the surprising low weight of 440g, compared to the 745g of the Nikkor. Far from making any technical tests, I am really not able to see any difference in the D200 full size images made by this Tamron and with the genuine 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S Nikkor. Actually, my Tamron has less barrel distortions, than my Nikkor. Only the corner aberrations with 17mm and full open aperture seem to be higher. By generic problem with all Di Tamron lenses is the lack of large enough non moving part of its cylinder. When you try to change the lens, you end up turning the zoom and/or focus ring instead. Warning: The rear cap made by Tamron is too wide and not compatible with the Nikkors, what comes really as a stunning surprise to me. Fortunately I got myself a bunch of Tokina caps and I rather use these. Hood is a liability. It reflects an immense amount of light on its internal side.

Guest		07-Jul-2006 08:20
very happy with this lens, some samples here http://www.pbase.com/isogood/tamron_17_35&page=all

Guest		09-May-2006 12:37
Got one on a Canon 20D and it turns out some very nice pics - sharp with good colour. AF isn't USM but it's not bad cos there's not much travel on the focus ring. a few samples in here (more will come!):-http://www.pbase.com/dharden/peaks_digital

Guest		08-Jan-2006 17:59
A great lens which i am very happy with... Highly worth its price. Very sharp, great colour rendering, Silent and quite fast AF for a non USM lens.

Guest		20-Dec-2005 09:18
Great lens, great price, great photos Sam http://www.pbase.com/bircher

All photos are copyrighted and may not be used without permission from the photographer.
These photos are are a guide to what these cameras are capable of, but may not fully represent the camera due to post-processing, scanning, or photographic technique.
All brands are trademarked by their owners.
These pages are not sponsored or approved by the manufacturers.
Other content Copyright © 2003,2004,2005,2006, pbase.com LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Contact cameras@pbase.com to contribute data or photos of cameras.