Nikon 18-105mm vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8

[Warlord9]

Hi folks,

Would like to ask the main difference between Nikon 18-105mm vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I'm thinking whether should I upgrade to the tamron lens as I m currently holding D90 kits lens and 50mm 1.8.
I know abt the fix stop of the tamron f2.8 and advantage in low light condition but however will the picture quality/result difference when both of the lens in same setting for aperture e.g: f8.0 :dunno:
Thanks !!

 

[enzeru21]

try a search...

here's one..

http://digitalphotographer.com.ph/forum/showthread.php?t=25163

 

[meisterSG]

I was in the same situation about 2mos ago... I ended up selling my 18-105 and replaced with tammy 17-50...
This tammy did not disappointed me... I highly recommend this lens. See some of the photos I took with this lens..

(sorry the thread title was wrong, should be 17-50 and not 17-55)
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=724119

 

[Ghaz1]

Hi folks,

Would like to ask the main difference between Nikon 18-105mm vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I'm thinking whether should I upgrade to the tamron lens as I m currently holding D90 kits lens and 50mm 1.8.
I know abt the fix stop of the tamron f2.8 and advantage in low light condition but however will the picture quality/result difference when both of the lens in same setting for aperture e.g: f8.0 :dunno:
Thanks !!

The biggest difference is the 55mm on the long end other than the f-stop of course. At f8.0,
i'm betting you will not see a discernable difference in real world usage. So you have to decide
by looking at what you like to shoot most of the time. For landscapes, i think you
wouldn't miss the 55mm that much but still it would be helpful to isolate certain features
in a scene. For streets, the 55mm may come in handy and you won't have to swap lenses that much.
For portraiture, the f2.8 aperture will render nicer bokeh. For events, many times you may be wishing
you had that extra 1mm on the wide side for group photos. It all depends on you.

 

[daredevil123]

Hi folks,

Would like to ask the main difference between Nikon 18-105mm vs Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I'm thinking whether should I upgrade to the tamron lens as I m currently holding D90 kits lens and 50mm 1.8.
I know abt the fix stop of the tamron f2.8 and advantage in low light condition but however will the picture quality/result difference when both of the lens in same setting for aperture e.g: f8.0 :dunno:
Thanks !!

The differences are:
18-105 is longer by 55mm at the long end.
17-50 is shorter by 1mm at the wide end.
17-50 gives yous ability to go to F2.8 at any focal length.
17-50 has no VR unless you get the VC version.
17-50 VC version has 72mm filter thread. Only non-VC version has 67mm just like 18-105.
17-50 has metal mount, 18-105 have plastic mount.

So you decide what you need based on your shooting style/requirements.

At F8, they both perform quite similarly. Tamron seems to be able to resolve slightly better.

 

[Blur Shadow]

I really think both lenses serve different functions. You'll really have to figure out what you want from your lenses.