18-105 vs tammy 17-50?


qwerty628

New Member
Jan 3, 2010
608
0
0
#1
Hi guys,

Was thinking about selling my 18-105 for a tammy 17-50. Do u guys think its worth it?:dunno:
 

edutilos-

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2010
6,032
17
38
The Universe
www.facebook.com
#2
It's up to you, you know... You have your own unique set of uses, you have your own requirements.

I'm not you. Most people here are not you.
 

DrSpock

New Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,088
0
0
Warp back to Simei
#4
These 2 lenses are totally diff in usage & value. Whether worth or not really depends on what you want & what type of photography you like. If just for casual walkabout the kit lens is usable & good. If you need wider aperture to shoot in dim lighting conditions then the Tammy is very usable especially VC version U can go as low as 1/8s without tripod.

I bought this Tammy VC version when it first came out to replace the kit lens of the D90 and now it is always on my D300s so to me the $800 is well worth it.;)
 

qwerty628

New Member
Jan 3, 2010
608
0
0
#5
It's up to you, you know... You have your own unique set of uses, you have your own requirements.

I'm not you. Most people here are not you.
hmmm ok. i'm leaning towards getting the tammy cos the f2.8, iq.

i ilke the original than 3rd party, but u can buy 17-50 first then try...
thats why, im a bit concerned abt tammy's focus
 

qwerty628

New Member
Jan 3, 2010
608
0
0
#6
These 2 lenses are totally diff in usage & value. Whether worth or not really depends on what you want & what type of photography you like. If just for casual walkabout the kit lens is usable & good. If you need wider aperture to shoot in dim lighting conditions then the Tammy is very usable especially VC version U can go as low as 1/8s without tripod.

I bought this Tammy VC version when it first came out to replace the kit lens of the D90 and now it is always on my D300s so to me the $800 is well worth it.;)
I realised that i don't really like to shoot in the day...thats why im thinking that tammy might be more useful.

Do you have any experience with the non vc version? heard that its better than the vc :dunno:
 

DrSpock

New Member
Mar 12, 2009
1,088
0
0
Warp back to Simei
#7
I realised that i don't really like to shoot in the day...thats why im thinking that tammy might be more useful.

Do you have any experience with the non vc version? heard that its better than the vc :dunno:
To be honest, I only went for this tammy bcos of the VC and I like the versatility of using it indoors handheld w/o flash. It's worth the xtra $200 more. Got plenty of good memories using this lens. Sharp and fast. Guess I got lucky havin a good copy.
 

qwerty628

New Member
Jan 3, 2010
608
0
0
#8
To be honest, I only went for this tammy bcos of the VC and I like the versatility of using it indoors handheld w/o flash. It's worth the xtra $200 more. Got plenty of good memories using this lens. Sharp and fast. Guess I got lucky havin a good copy.
cool. thx :D but vc version a bit too ex for me :(
 

Dec 4, 2008
790
0
0
#9
These 2 lenses are totally diff in usage & value. Whether worth or not really depends on what you want & what type of photography you like. If just for casual walkabout the kit lens is usable & good. If you need wider aperture to shoot in dim lighting conditions then the Tammy is very usable especially VC version U can go as low as 1/8s without tripod.

I bought this Tammy VC version when it first came out to replace the kit lens of the D90 and now it is always on my D300s so to me the $800 is well worth it.;)
so which body does the tammy focus faster?
or there is no diff in the af speed..
interested to know..
 

Oct 19, 2009
1,669
0
0
#13
I was once the same situation as you.

Anyway, I sold my 18-135 for a Tamron 17-50, and never since I've regretted.

Very good for both landscape and travelling. The constant f/2.8 makes it easier to shoot under low light or unexpected locations.
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,645
63
48
lil red dot
#14
twisted illusion said:
so which body does the tammy focus faster?
or there is no diff in the af speed..
interested to know..
For the vc and bim versions the focusing speeds should not make too much difference.

The non bim version depends on the screw drive motor. So semi pro bodies like d200 d300 will focus faster than the enthusiast bodies like d90 d80 d70 or the d50.

For canon, since all focus motors are in lens, not much significant diff.
 

qwerty628

New Member
Jan 3, 2010
608
0
0
#15
I was once the same situation as you.

Anyway, I sold my 18-135 for a Tamron 17-50, and never since I've regretted.

Very good for both landscape and travelling. The constant f/2.8 makes it easier to shoot under low light or unexpected locations.
your one got vc? ;p
 

qwerty628

New Member
Jan 3, 2010
608
0
0
#16
For the vc and bim versions the focusing speeds should not make too much difference.

The non bim version depends on the screw drive motor. So semi pro bodies like d200 d300 will focus faster than the enthusiast bodies like d90 d80 d70 or the d50.

For canon, since all focus motors are in lens, not much significant diff.
erm, pardon my ignorance but wads bim?

Mine's a d7000. so it'll be under enthusiast? but they seem to have made d7000 more semi pro leh?
 

wmayeo

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
1,571
0
0
Singapore
#17
how long have you been shooting?
you will lose the reach if you sell away your 18-105.
 

qwerty628

New Member
Jan 3, 2010
608
0
0
#18
how long have you been shooting?
you will lose the reach if you sell away your 18-105.
coming to two years. not sure if i'll miss the reach.
dont really use 105mm much except for potraits where i want to isolate background. im typically at 18mm most of the time. dont exactly like to zoom :think:
 

wmayeo

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
1,571
0
0
Singapore
#19
coming to two years. not sure if i'll miss the reach.
dont really use 105mm much except for potraits where i want to isolate background. im typically at 18mm most of the time. dont exactly like to zoom :think:
why do you think of changing?

just asking to understand more so that forumers can advise you accordingly. :)
 

qwerty628

New Member
Jan 3, 2010
608
0
0
#20
why do you think of changing?

just asking to understand more so that forumers can advise you accordingly. :)
Mainly cos of constant f2.8. and the fact that so many are raving about its iq. But 18-105 iq also not bad as well.

My primary concern now is the autofocus and me budget ;p

I still have reservations about Tammy's autofocus. Primarily the non vc version. Heard the vc's autofocus is better but not sure how well it performs when stacked up against my 18-105
 

Last edited:
Top Bottom