| Deviant Login | Shop |
 | Join deviantART for FREE  |
Take the Tour  |
| Photography / Architecture / Exterior | ©2008-2013 *duncan-blues |
The Journal Portal
Browse Journals |
Polls |
deviantART [dee·vee·un'nt·ART]
Keep in Touch!
|
Deviousness `anmari has been spreading her infectious positivity throughout our community for over 6 years. Throughout this time Ana has been at the core of all things devious, passionately developing an eclectic gallery, helping organise devmeets, participating in chat events and also recently completed dedicating her time as a Community Volunteer. We are absolutely delighted to bestow the Deviousness Award for May 2013 to `anmari, congratulations! Read More
|
Sta.sh
I'm very pleased with the Tamron 17-50 lens. Sharpness is already quite good at 1:2.8, the AF is reliable and the look-and-feel of the lens is quite good for such a reasonably priced lens. Only the lens screen has a rather cheap feeling to it but it does it's job very well. Didn't have any notable problems with lens flares so far.
The focal range of 17-50mm seems a bit limited at first but the other day, during a long hiking tour, I used the lens almost exclusively and my Sony 16-105mm lens remained in the bag.
You might also check out the Sony 16-105 lens too though. It's not as fast aperture-wise but the range of focal length is extremely handy. Sharpness is not quite as good as the 17-50 but certainly better than the 18-70. The price tag is rather steep compared to the Tamron lens though.
You know, the thing you screw onto the front of the lens to prevent lens flare.
The plastic has a somewhat cheap, fragile feel to it. It does work perfectly though.
Distortion can be an issue with the 16-105 lens, yes. This isn't unexpected though with a superzoom lens. I'm more worried about it's rather prominent vignetting at 16mm.
I really like how it looks. Got a wallpaper-sized one?
Re Wallpaper: I could make one I guess.
I was there about one week ago.
World is small