18-105 vs tammy 17-50?
- Thread starter qwerty628
- Start date
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.
I'm not you. Most people here are not you.
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 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.
hmmm ok. i'm leaning towards getting the tammy cos the f2.8, iq.
thats why, im a bit concerned abt tammy's focus
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:
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.
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..
cool. thx
grey from one of the mass market merchant goes around 700...
an alternative for you...
me budget less than that, only got enough for non vc from b&s. provided i can sell my 18-105
:bsmilie:
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.
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.
twisted illusion said:
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?
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.
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:
Similar threads
