Should i keep my Tamron 17-50?

[kentjr]

Hi Bros,

I just got myself a CZ 1680, while currently i am mostly using a Tamron 17-50.

I am stuck, as in i don't know whether to sell of fmy Tamron 17-50 or to keep it for indoor shoots?

Or is it better to sell my Tamron and get a UWA lens.

All opinions are greatly appreciated!

Cheers!

[weishengg]

sell it an get a UWA if you don't already have one.

[kentjr]

you mean sell the tamron, Bro?

[boombox]

I think you can sell your 17-50 and get an ultra wide angle. Since you have the 16-80

[teodesson]

I have different opinion
Why must sell your tamron, it's can serve you better in lowlight

[s2s1]

Sell it and get WA, coz you will seldom use your Tamron. For low light, bring tripod or put your camera on stable surface, worst case increase ISO.

[stupidbear]

I will consider buying your Tamron at a reasonable price if you're selling

[kentjr]

Actually someone PMed me regarding the tam 17-50 already. And i only waiting for his reply...

[lenrek]

When others are so anxious to get the lens from you, is an indication, the lens is not that bad... However, if you are very sure you won't be using this lens anymore, then sell it.

[Titan10k]

You can try to keep the Tamron with you for a month more or two, it'll become very obvious to you if you need it anymore.

[kentjr]

Originally Posted by Titan10k You can try to keep the Tamron with you for a month more or two, it'll become very obvious to you if you need it anymore.

Yeah Man tt's what i think too bro.

Originally Posted by lenrek When others are so anxious to get the lens from you, is an indication, the lens is not that bad... However, if you are very sure you won't be using this lens anymore, then sell it.

The Tamron in fact is quite a good lens, i had it to replace my kit lens and it serve me well too. So heart pain to sell also. But eventually if not using still got to let it go.

[reaper3075]

Sell the tammy. Buy a flash if you dont have one, then there's no problem using the 16-80 in indoor low light situations

I've used both, and in my opinion, the CZ 16-80 is much better than the tammy. better colors, sharpness and obviously more usable range, +1mm wide and +30mm zoom.

[unimatrix]

i find that my 1750 is very useful when i want take non-intrusive pictures at low-light situation, such as during dinner, or in a restaurant.

say.. during travel, it's one less thing to carry, less one flash.

[Ouverture]

Agree Tamron1750 is definitely more versatile if comparing to CZ1680.

Though not as wide or long in focal length, but using it as outing serves you well....esp when you need to go indoor and outdoor frequently, like shopping with your family...

CZ1680 might be too slow if you are at a dim shop which flash is needed...

I used my Tamron quite extensively during my visit to Paris Disneyland where the outdoor is bright while indoor shops are very dim and it serves me well indeed as a single lens option...which enable me to shoot anytime anywhere and fast enough...

Somemore, Tamron is harder to find (for sony mount) whether 2nd hand or new as compared to CZ1680 which is available readily...so maybe it's a better lens to keep for value sake as well...

For me, i will definitely keep it as long as I continue on Sony and crop bodies...

[maximize]

i would think tammy is useful too if were to say IQ beside the point. i used to bring one whole bunch of lens during my first oversea trip with my alpha.. then i realise in the end all i need is the tammy. for me i would think the extra 2mm in wide and 30mm in zoom doesnt make do any limitation for me most of the time. i would like to get the 18-250 or 270. then it does make a diff to what i can reach. still.. sometimes i would like to hv a UWA cos esp travelling.. most of the shots are probably wide. probably another consideration for keeping the tammy is that the prob with UWA is distortion. if u are not in need of $.. i think u shld keep it. ISO is never a solution to everything imo.

[unimatrix]

Originally Posted by maximize i would think tammy is useful too if were to say IQ beside the point. i used to bring one whole bunch of lens during my first oversea trip with my alpha.. then i realise in the end all i need is the tammy. for me i would think the extra 2mm in wide and 30mm in zoom doesnt make do any limitation for me most of the time. i would like to get the 18-250 or 270. then it does make a diff to what i can reach. still.. sometimes i would like to hv a UWA cos esp travelling.. most of the shots are probably wide. probably another consideration for keeping the tammy is that the prob with UWA is distortion. if u are not in need of $.. i think u shld keep it. ISO is never a solution to everything imo.

18-250 is a difficult lens to use when lighting is limited.
it takes ages to AF-lock and its lack of large aperture makes the picture sometimes blurry.
it's great when lighting is abundant though (like during the day).

i'd stick to 17-50 with limited lighting (say in the evening), and use the 18-250 during the day.

from some of the review websites IQ for 1750 isn't too shabby either .. in fact one of them compared it with 16-80, and it wasn't world apart of difference ..

btw, i don't think tamron has 18-270 on alpha mount.

[maximize]

Originally Posted by unimatrix 18-250 is a difficult lens to use when lighting is limited. it takes ages to AF-lock and its lack of large aperture makes the picture sometimes blurry. it's great when lighting is abundant though (like during the day). i'd stick to 17-50 with limited lighting (say in the evening), and use the 18-250 during the day. from some of the review websites IQ for 1750 isn't too shabby either .. in fact one of them compared it with 16-80, and it wasn't world apart of difference .. btw, i don't think tamron has 18-270 on alpha mount.

u are absolutely correct. 18-270 no alpha mount yet only for 18-250. i use my 28-300 since i do not have a 18-250 only for the day too. once the sun begins to set i switch to 17-50. no point for me to use my 28-300 anymore. but still most of the time i will only use the 17-50. i think wat we trying to tell the TS here is that Tammy is a veri good travelling lens to hv. it definitely worth a second thought to keep or sell.

[kentjr]

Originally Posted by maximize u are absolutely correct. 18-270 no alpha mount yet only for 18-250. i use my 28-300 since i do not have a 18-250 only for the day too. once the sun begins to set i switch to 17-50. no point for me to use my 28-300 anymore. but still most of the time i will only use the 17-50. i think wat we trying to tell the TS here is that Tammy is a veri good travelling lens to hv. it definitely worth a second thought to keep or sell.

I already sold my Tamron 16-80. Kinda miss it during low light shoots.........
Now thinking whether to get one more or not........LoL

[Ouverture]

Originally Posted by kentjr I already sold my Tamron 16-80. Kinda miss it during low light shoots......... Now thinking whether to get one more or not........LoL

Bro, my question for u may have been asked many times before...but since now my wallet is itching to spend, wanted to ask u some questions on cz1680.

I also have Tamron17-50 and although it's a good low light lens and IQ is quite good, however find it sometimes not long enough for shoots like at the beach or poolside with my son.

I am considering either 16-105, 1680z, 18-250, min35-105 or beercan.

Of course, the sony ones are preferred as I do not lose the wide angle and can use as one-lens solution for travelling.

I have heard many nightmare stories on cz1680 that it has AF problems and has QC problems on the built quality. That's why i wondering would it be worth to spend so much for a good glass but medicore built quality. I am not sure whether it is the reasons why many are being sold at B&S as well.

As for 16-105, has longer reach but afraid might have same QC problem as per CZ ones. And not too sure if the colour and sharpness is comparable or lose to CZ a lot.

For 18-250, have seen many good comments on this lens, although touted as slow AF compared to the previous 2 lenses. But the reach of this lens is really god-send but dunno about the quality though.

For the minoltas, 35-105 and beercan are obviously "tested and well liked" by many pros here, however I will lose the wide angle and it's a old lens and topping up by maybe 100+ to 200 can get a 2nd hand lenses above.

Really confused....hope you can shed some light on your usage from cz....

thanks in advance.

[teodesson]

since you have tamron 17-50, why not considering sigma 50-150mm f2.8? Combine with your tamron, you'll get a good pair of fast lens.
I have cz1680, and I must say this is a good lens that I will never release at least I got better lens like cz2470 (which I can say far away from my dream).