| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:27 am Post subject: Is 200 euros too much for a TAMRON SP 17 mm f/3,5? |
 |
|
tardegardo wrote:
I found this auction: http://cgi.ebay.it/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170823822765&ssPageName=ADME:B:ONA:IT:3160
5 more days to the end, so I guess the price is going to raise…
I cannot access the price guide site;
200 euros is too much for this lens, is it?
Tardegardo |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
eddieitman
Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 1246
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
eddieitman wrote:
Am affraid i would say its far to much for a lens like that.
Personally i would buy the AF version of the 17-50 that can be had for not much more than that and is a constant F2.8 and a very nice lens with much better coatings and optics than the 17mm
I have tested teh tamron version of the 17mm on the Nex and was very disapointed in it
_________________
My web site www.digital-darkroom.weebly.com
Life is like a camera. Focus on what's important, capture the good times, develop from the negatives and if things don't work out, just take another shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
tardegardo wrote:
| eddieitman wrote: |
Am affraid i would say its far to much for a lens like that.
Personally i would buy the AF version of the 17-50 that can be had for not much more than that and is a constant F2.8 and a very nice lens with much better coatings and optics than the 17mm
I have tested teh tamron version of the 17mm on the Nex and was very disapointed in it |
thank you eddie…
I'll look for the 17-50 then! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
it is depend.. how would like to use it.
My lens was disappointment on 4/3 and micro 4/3 and perform pretty well on Sony NEX.
I have better lenses , but I kept it , because usable on any camera thanks for Adaptall-2 mount I can use ony any film SLR what come into my hands with good results.
First pictures are taken with SONY NEX, last ones with Olympus E-1
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/japenese/Tamron/tamron_sp_17mm_f3_5/?
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
tardegardo wrote:
| eddieitman wrote: |
Am affraid i would say its far to much for a lens like that.
Personally i would buy the AF version of the 17-50 that can be had for not much more than that and is a constant F2.8 and a very nice lens with much better coatings and optics than the 17mm
I have tested teh tamron version of the 17mm on the Nex and was very disapointed in it |
Ops, forgot to say: 17-50 isn't good on full frame….
and I have a 5dmk2
Last edited by tardegardo on Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:20 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Kinda makes sense for full frame, but not for crop sensor cameras. However, price is too high, I'd rather have the Samyang 14/2.8 if the budget is that high.
_________________
Graham - Moderator 
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eddieitman
Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 1246
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
eddieitman wrote:
Ahh Graham now there is a good choice the 14mm is a spectacular lens from everything i have seen
_________________
My web site www.digital-darkroom.weebly.com
Life is like a camera. Focus on what's important, capture the good times, develop from the negatives and if things don't work out, just take another shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dave_t
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 214
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dave_t wrote:
| eddieitman wrote: |
| Ahh Graham now there is a good choice the 14mm is a spectacular lens from everything i have seen |
I own the Samyang 14mm and it is indeed an impressive lens, especially paired with PTLens to reduce distortion. I will advise that people truly know what they are going to use something this wide for, as it is fairly specialized in my opinion, but the results are great. Also keep in mind that on the Samyang, you don't have the ability to use any filters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tardegardo wrote:
| dave_t wrote: |
| eddieitman wrote: |
| Ahh Graham now there is a good choice the 14mm is a spectacular lens from everything i have seen |
I own the Samyang 14mm and it is indeed an impressive lens, especially paired with PTLens to reduce distortion. I will advise that people truly know what they are going to use something this wide for, as it is fairly specialized in my opinion, but the results are great. Also keep in mind that on the Samyang, you don't have the ability to use any filters. |
yes, I know about filters,
I am going to buy one though! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10739
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
| eddieitman wrote: |
Am affraid i would say its far to much for a lens like that.
Personally i would buy the AF version of the 17-50 that can be had for not much more than that and is a constant F2.8 and a very nice lens with much better coatings and optics than the 17mm
I have tested teh tamron version of the 17mm on the Nex and was very disapointed in it |
17 works great on APS-C and FF sensors. 200 seems a bit high but not unreasonable; I'm thinking 175 is about right for the earlier version with built-in filters in good condition; 160 for later version without filters built-in.
The AF 17-50 with constant f/2.8 sounds great! Is that a FF lens or for APS-C only? I have a (rare) Sigma 17-35/2.8-4 EX HSM -- at 17 it is as good as maybe better than Tamron SP 17 on FF.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eddieitman
Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 1246
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eddieitman wrote:
Visual, its and APSC lens,
_________________
My web site www.digital-darkroom.weebly.com
Life is like a camera. Focus on what's important, capture the good times, develop from the negatives and if things don't work out, just take another shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tardegardo wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
| eddieitman wrote: |
Am affraid i would say its far to much for a lens like that.
Personally i would buy the AF version of the 17-50 that can be had for not much more than that and is a constant F2.8 and a very nice lens with much better coatings and optics than the 17mm
I have tested teh tamron version of the 17mm on the Nex and was very disapointed in it |
17 works great on APS-C and FF sensors. 200 seems a bit high but not unreasonable; I'm thinking 175 is about right for the earlier version with built-in filters in good condition; 160 for later version without filters built-in.
The AF 17-50 with constant f/2.8 sounds great! Is that a FF lens or for APS-C only? I have a (rare) Sigma 17-35/2.8-4 EX HSM -- at 17 it is as good as maybe better than Tamron SP 17 on FF. |
I need a ff lens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Look a Tokina RMC 17mm lens.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
..
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it!
Last edited by iangreenhalgh1 on Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:55 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
berraneck
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 972
Location: prague, czech republic
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
berraneck wrote:
this picture wouldn´t convince me about qualities of tokina:)
_________________
equipment doesn´t count, good photographs do |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tardegardo wrote:
| berraneck wrote: |
| this picture wouldn´t convince me about qualities of tokina:) |
hehehe….
I appreciate it btw |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
This is what I don't like about many people on this forum, they are free with their words but rarely put their pictures where there mouth is.
Sorry for trying to be helpful.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tardegardo wrote:
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
This is what I don't like about many people on this forum, they are free with their words but rarely put their pictures where there mouth is.
Sorry for trying to be helpful. |
No Ian, please. I appreciate your effort. And the pic too |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Tokina RMC 17 one of the best perhaps best affordable wide lens option, take a research worth to do it.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
| tardegardo wrote: |
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
This is what I don't like about many people on this forum, they are free with their words but rarely put their pictures where there mouth is.
Sorry for trying to be helpful. |
No Ian, please. I appreciate your effort. And the pic too |
Oh, no need, I am silly for being touchy.
I'm only beginning to learn to shoot film and develop it myself so my results are not the best. There's not much point in me showing pictures with my Tokina 17 on APS-C as you're not seeing the FF performance.
There are some film pics from it here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1224232.html#1224232
It really is a great lens, a big bargain for it's price.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tardegardo wrote:
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
| tardegardo wrote: |
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
This is what I don't like about many people on this forum, they are free with their words but rarely put their pictures where there mouth is.
Sorry for trying to be helpful. |
No Ian, please. I appreciate your effort. And the pic too |
Oh, no need, I am silly for being touchy.
I'm only beginning to learn to shoot film and develop it myself so my results are not the best. There's not much point in me showing pictures with my Tokina 17 on APS-C as you're not seeing the FF performance.
There are some film pics from it here:
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1224232.html#1224232
It really is a great lens, a big bargain for it's price. |
I am sure this tokina 17mm is a very nice lens. The problem is it has an fd mount and I have a very poor quality fd - Ef adapter. I guess it depends on the quality of the small lens in it. Anyway, That's why I was looking for a m42 lens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
berraneck
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 972
Location: prague, czech republic
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
berraneck wrote:
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
| This is what I don't like about many people on this forum, they are free with their words but rarely put their pictures where there mouth is. Sorry for trying to be helpful. |
I´m sorry sir, just wanted to point out that the picture doesn´t show how the lens good is, and I don´t mean composition or so. It was not meant to be personal.
tardegardo: tokina17 was made in different mounts and isn´t so rare, so finding one in proper mount won´t be problem
_________________
equipment doesn´t count, good photographs do |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tardegardo
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tardegardo wrote:
| berraneck wrote: |
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
| This is what I don't like about many people on this forum, they are free with their words but rarely put their pictures where there mouth is. Sorry for trying to be helpful. |
I´m sorry sir, just wanted to point out that the picture doesn´t show how the lens good is, and I don´t mean composition or so. It was not meant to be personal.
tardegardo: tokina17 was made in different mounts and isn´t so rare, so finding one in proper mount won´t be problem |
thx! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
