Should i Get a 17-50mm tamron or a Panasonic LX3

Which to Get???


Results are only viewable after voting.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sep 2, 2006
286
0
0
#1
hey guys I just sold my 17-55mm to get a 80-200mm 2.8 and a 85mm 1.8

my set up is a D90

main reason y i sold the 17-55 was because its dx and i don't want to hold it for too long as the price is dropping quite fast and the demand i worry might drop futher due to the intro of FX stuff.

i love the new lenses but i will be needing something for wider stuff.

Was wondering if i should get a Tamron 17-50 or a Panasonic Lx3..

I know the pros and cons but i just thought of getting opinions from other people\



THANKS and CHEERS
 

ricleo

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2004
6,570
30
48
Eastern Singapore
#2
isn't the tamron 17-50 a DX lens as well? but it is much cheaper though. If u no longer have the kit lens of the D90, i guess the 17-50 will make sense as a walkabout lens.

if you still have the kit lens, might as well keep using it and get the lx3 as a portable camera for the times a dslr is too heavy.
 

Sep 2, 2006
286
0
0
#3
yeah its a DX too but at least it doesn't cost like 1500 hhahhah

i don't have the 18-55 sold it cos i need the 2.8 so yeah
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#4
What's the purpose of the Panasonic LX-3?
 

Ouverture

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2009
2,195
0
0
#5
hey guys I just sold my 17-55mm to get a 80-200mm 2.8 and a 85mm 1.8

my set up is a D90

main reason y i sold the 17-55 was because its dx and i don't want to hold it for too long as the price is dropping quite fast and the demand i worry might drop futher due to the intro of FX stuff.

i love the new lenses but i will be needing something for wider stuff.

Was wondering if i should get a Tamron 17-50 or a Panasonic Lx3..

I know the pros and cons but i just thought of getting opinions from other people\



THANKS and CHEERS
Actually you should tell us what's the urgency of getting either one.

Buy only when you need it for certain shoots, not buying it when you think you want it, if not you will lose more when you sell them later.

But if I were you, then maybe use the kit lens for your wide angle requirement, and buy LX3 as the light travel camera. So you covered all your bases.
 

diver-hloc

Moderator
Staff member
Apr 17, 2007
5,213
13
38
Somewhere North
#7
Err... like ClubSNAP-er - night86mare - pointed out.... One is a LENS and the other is a manual capable PnS Camera.

Could TS at least tell us what you 'Planned' to do ?? :think:
 

miel

New Member
Jun 13, 2004
113
0
0
#8
i think get lx3 good idea, smaller than carry around d90 with 17-50mm. plus i think i understand u want take good portrait and can telephoto. to u wide angle shots can be covered by lx3 right?

lx3 can put inside pocket and carry around. d90 cannot. so to me. i think lx3 is kewl to have since u so worried about dx lens so much.
 

Sep 2, 2006
286
0
0
#9
Hey guys oki just need something for wider purposes like wider stuff compared to my 80-200 and 85mm

y i thought of getting a lx3 was to make it easier to shoot instead of switching lenses.

i like portraits ut also like walk about and general photography so thats why i need a wider angle compared to my 80mm stuff
 

diver-hloc

Moderator
Staff member
Apr 17, 2007
5,213
13
38
Somewhere North
#10
Then Buy the LX3 and sell away your whole DSLR collection.... wouldn't have to change lens anymore.... plus will save you some money.
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#11
Hey guys oki just need something for wider purposes like wider stuff compared to my 80-200 and 85mm

y i thought of getting a lx3 was to make it easier to shoot instead of switching lenses.

i like portraits ut also like walk about and general photography so thats why i need a wider angle compared to my 80mm stuff
walkabout and general photography?
I thought the D90's kit lens covered that pretty well.

Any reason why you insist on f/2.8?
Do you use the widest aperture for your walkabout shots?
 

navlem

New Member
Sep 16, 2007
881
0
0
#12
while LX3 is a good cam, it can never win D90. Getting a tamron would yield better results :)
 

Sep 2, 2006
286
0
0
#13
the D90 i bought did no come with a lens just body.

i like to shoot wide open of bokeh

wider shots don't really need wide open.
 

ZerocoolAstra

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2008
9,522
0
0
rainy Singapore
#14
My assumption is that you'd be using your wide angles for landscapes mainly, thus you'd be stepping down at least to f/8 for a greater depth of field.
This largely negates the benefit of needing a fast lens.
BUT BUT BUT. Wide angle lenses aren't only used for landscapes, thus the wide aperture COULD be beneficial to your style of photography. I've found no need for myself, but these are all personal choices.
 

Sep 2, 2006
286
0
0
#15
i am just thinking there are days i don't want to bring out a big cam

and

there are times when i need a wider shot and i don't have time to change lenses i can just whip out the pns.

i am leaning more towards the LX3 but just wanted to see the more senior/ expert view on it.

i have been impressed by alot of the lx3 pictures and its macro abilities too.

like i said looking for advice and comments
and there have been alot that i appreciate.

more is welcomed
 

#16
i am just thinking there are days i don't want to bring out a big cam

and

there are times when i need a wider shot and i don't have time to change lenses i can just whip out the pns.

i am leaning more towards the LX3 but just wanted to see the more senior/ expert view on it.

i have been impressed by alot of the lx3 pictures and its macro abilities too.

like i said looking for advice and comments
and there have been alot that i appreciate.

more is welcomed

I would get the Tamron 17-50 first, then save up for a LX3. The IQ of the LX3 would never be able to compare with a D90. For me, IQ is important, so I'd get the Tamron first. ;)
 

Edwin Francis

Senior Member
Mar 24, 2006
880
3
18
www.sgwriter.com
#17
i like to shoot wide open of bokeh
Does this statement apply to your 17-55? Cause, if you're not aware, it won't be the same with the LX3 (smaller sensors = shorter focal lengths = greater depth-of-field). The LX3 lens may be f2 - 2.8, but it's also very short focal length, 5.1-12.8mm.

Other than that, your choice would depend on what's more important to you -- highest image quality/maximum control etc (D90) or weight/convenience/stealth. Personally, I think you're going to miss the 17-55, and will want to get a replacement (I would have kept it in the 1st place, depreciation be damned). Get the LX3 and you're D90 will probably end up staying at home a lot ;)
 

Sep 2, 2006
286
0
0
#18
Does this statement apply to your 17-55? Cause, if you're not aware, it won't be the same with the LX3 (smaller sensors = shorter focal lengths = greater depth-of-field). The LX3 lens may be f2 - 2.8, but it's also very short focal length, 5.1-12.8mm.

Other than that, your choice would depend on what's more important to you -- highest image quality/maximum control etc (D90) or weight/convenience/stealth. Personally, I think you're going to miss the 17-55, and will want to get a replacement (I would have kept it in the 1st place, depreciation be damned). Get the LX3 and you're D90 will probably end up staying at home a lot ;)
the 17-55 as the only lens i had and i traded it for a 80-200 2.8 two touch, 85 mm 1.8 and 100 bucks

as i was using the 17-55 i always felt that i was too short for some of my shots, and that i needed to get something closer tats why i got the 80-200 nd the 85mm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23995133@N00/sets/72157616974967431/

here are some of my photos i had to crop the F1 ones and some others yeah


i prefer portraits so is my 85mm going to be enough for will i need the 17-50

i have used both the 17-50 tamron nd the 17-55 nikon and my eyes can't really tell too much of a difference in quality.
 

Sep 2, 2006
286
0
0
#20
hahahah in the end i got both traded for my 85mm cos i already have the 80-200 hahaha
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom