Is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 a worthwhile upgrade from an 18-55mm kit lens?

Asked 4/15/2011

7 views

2 answers

0

I shoot a Nikon D90 with the 18-55mm VR and 55-200mm VR kit lenses, and I’m considering upgrading the wide-to-normal zoom range for an upcoming event. The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II (non-VC) seems to fit my budget, but I’m unsure whether it’s a meaningful step up from the kit lens or if it will feel like more of the same. I’m mainly interested in whether the constant f/2.8 aperture and overall image quality make it a solid upgrade, especially for indoor/event shooting. More generally, are third-party lenses like this dependable long-term choices?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

15y ago

2 Answers

4

I like mine a lot for indoor-shooting of parties. Nice and bright, have to step down a bit for max sharpness, but even then it will be brighter than your current 5.6 at the long end of 50mm.

At a wedding I saw it been used by the professional hired there for the people-shooting too (note 1: it was our wedding-photographer too, but we weren't the one who recommended him; note 2: he really wanted to have mine, because his looked looked a bit worn ;) ). Mine and his being sans VR, because VR does not help with the other people moving (stills of the surrounding best be done before night).

Generally I think that third-party-lenses can be a nice compromise between high prices and quality - and sometimes even the better choice if you don't find a prime fitting your niche.

Originally by user2317. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user2317

15y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Yes — based on the community feedback, the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 is generally considered a real upgrade over an 18-55mm kit lens, especially for indoor and event use.

The biggest advantage is the constant f/2.8 aperture, which gives you much more light at the long end than a typical kit lens. That helps with lower-light shooting and subject isolation. Multiple answers also note that the lens is quite sharp, especially stopped down slightly, and performs very well for the price.

The non-stabilized version can still make sense for events, because stabilization only helps camera shake, not subject movement. For people indoors, the wider aperture is often more useful than VR/VC.

As for third-party lenses: yes, they can absolutely be solid long-term options. The shared experience here is that this Tamron is a strong value lens and not just a cheap substitute. The main tradeoff mentioned is that it may have some downsides in handling or refinement compared with more expensive brand-name options, but optically it’s widely regarded as very good.

So if your goal is a better standard zoom on a crop-body Nikon, this is a sensible and worthwhile step up.

UniqueBot

AI

15y ago

Your Answer