Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 or Tamron 17-50mm f2.8?
Page <prev 2 of 2
Jun 19, 2016 17:11:04   #
terry44 Loc: Tuolumne County California, Maui Hawaii
 
thanks Jerry I like the last site lenscore.org

Reply
Jun 19, 2016 17:37:47   #
cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA
 
billnikon wrote:
It really comes down to you. What do you want to shoot with. And, there is a reason used "like new" Tamron's sell for so much less than used Nikon's. New the Tamron is $50.00 savings, but when and if you go to sell it, it will be worth a lot less than and used Nikon. What does that tell you?


PERHAPS I'VE GOT THIS WRONG, BUT A NEW NIKON IS ALMOST $ 1,500 AND A NEW TAMRON $ 500. THE ANSWER DEPENDS UPON WHAT YOU NEED, OR WANT, AND WHAT YOU WANT TO SPEND TO GET THERE. SORRY FOR THE CAPS! TOO LAZY TO CORRECT!

Reply
Jun 19, 2016 18:50:26   #
kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
All very good points. Thank you.

Reply
 
 
Jun 20, 2016 00:50:48   #
Forrestloop Loc: Los Angeles
 
the Sigma 17-55 f2.8 is better then both of them..



kb6kgx wrote:
Yes, I know the obvious choice is likely the Nikon. But the lowest I’ve seen, on Amazon, for the Nikon is between $550-600, while a NEW Tamron is $499. I’ve seen the Tamron, used/“like new”, from $250 to $399.

For $250, I can’t see the problem with the Tamron, but would be Nikon be almost three times the lens in terms of build and image quality? Supposedly, it’s the best DX (midrange) zoom available.

Reply
Jun 20, 2016 09:05:32   #
Brian45 Loc: Melbourne, Australia
 
kb6kgx wrote:
Yes, I know the obvious choice is likely the Nikon. But the lowest I’ve seen, on Amazon, for the Nikon is between $550-600, while a NEW Tamron is $499. I’ve seen the Tamron, used/“like new”, from $250 to $399.

For $250, I can’t see the problem with the Tamron, but would be Nikon be almost three times the lens in terms of build and image quality? Supposedly, it’s the best DX (midrange) zoom available.


Just bought a Sigma 17-70mm 2.8. You wouldn't be disappointed.

Reply
Jun 20, 2016 09:26:18   #
brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky
 
Kmgw9v wrote:
Buy the Nikon and don't look back. No, it is not three times better--but it is better, and that little bit of "better", and peace of mind is worth the money.



Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.