[driverace]

Originally Posted by NetfreakBombay

Has anyone used "Tamron SP AF 17 - 50 mm F/2.8" lense ? What is your opinion on this.

I am looking for a lens to be used indoors. I have a 35 mm prime, but that is not wide enough in quite a few situations (and I dont have 1 lakh to spend on Nikon 24 - 70).

NetfreakBombay,

I am in almost the same boat
Have the 18-55 + 35mm combo.
I don't need anything beyond 70mm & I would love to have wider aperture with a decent zoom range.
So the dilemma is among the below trio :

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm F/2.8 @ 30K

Plus:
2.8 across 28 to 75
Good long range

Minus:
Not wide really. ALMOST as wide as 35mm.

OR
Sigma 17-70mm F/ 2.8-4 @ 32K

Plus:
Wide enough & Long enough too
2.8 @ wide end (only).

Minus:
Other than at 17mm, the aperture will get narrower (lesser isolation/bokehh )
F4 @ Long end

OR
Sigma 17-50mm F/2.8 @ 31K (?)

Plus:
2.8 through out the range
Wide enough

Minus:
Not good enough on the long end

---

I can not justify spending anything over 30ish Grand for a lens, at the moment. Have few other monetary commitments which will still be of primary importance upto at least 1-2 years!
I am just a beginner & enjoy photography as a hobby.

Please share your choice/preference here, that will help me too!

Ace.

[condor]

Guys, What about the Nikkor 24-85 ?

[tasuray]

I used to use Tamron 17-50mm non VC lens with my Nikon D7000 and it can be rest assured that it is a great lens for general purpose use. As it has f/2.8, works great in low light conditions. As its focal length is not very long,VC is not required so much. So far I know it comes about Rs.16500/- now. But VC version is approx. Rs.10000 - 12000/- higher than this.

I have a question, is anybody(BHPians) using Tamron 150-600 mm ? I am thinking of purchasing this lens for wildlife and birds. But I am doubful about the low light performance of the lens as f no. is not very great. Any kind of feedback will be helpful for me to take the decision because this is not only very costly but also for a particular field of use.

Regards.

[amitk26]

NFB the problem with Tamron Lenses is poor build quality , Initially it does not sound like much of issue for hobbyists but eventually it can be a problem over the time.

For example I had Tamron SP 90 F2.8 the ribbon of focus clutch broke and I had to spend money to get it repaired ( at DeenDayal Camera) after repair there was some play and I had to argue the shop to reset it and finally they could set it right. Finally I sold that lens ( after reliable repair) and invested in Canon 100mm F2.8.

Compared to this Sigma EX DG has better build quality ( judging by my Sigma 10-20 and Sigma 35mm F1.4) and also image quality.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by tasuray

I have a question, is anybody(BHPians) using Tamron 150-600 mm ? I am thinking of purchasing this lens for wildlife and birds. But I am doubful about the low light performance of the lens as f no. is not very great. Any kind of feedback will be helpful for me to take the decision because this is not only very costly but also for a particular field of use.

Regards.

I am waiting for the Sigma 150-600mm (S) to launch. I will then decide. Meanwhile, I am planning to rent the Tamron and see if I like the ergonomics.

The Tamron is a great VFM lens. People make too much noise about the 'slowness' of lens. If you are used to shooting the long f/4 or f.2.8 primes, then the cribs make sense. But so many people shoot birds and wildlife with f/5.6 lenses (e.g. Canon 100-400, Nikon 80-400, Canon 400mm f/5.6 etc.). How much difference will a f/6.3 lens make? Even at f/8 - stopping down for sharpness, and at 600mm, the depth of field will be shallow, allowing for nice wildlife portraits.

And yes, I am talking from a wildlife shooter's perspective. One who has shot wildlife for years using 'slow' f/5.6 lenses.

[M35]

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

I am waiting for the Sigma 150-600mm (S) to launch. I will then decide. Meanwhile, I am planning to rent the Tamron and see if I like the ergonomics.

The Sigma 150-600s are available here in China/Hong Kong.
The Contemporary variant is priced at close to the Tammy 150-600 where as the Sports variant way expensive, nearly double the price of that of the former.


Won’t it make more sense to go in with the Nikkor 300mm f4 prime + TC instead of the Siggy Sports ? I know the former doesn’t have VR but it’s a quality Nikkor prime glass.

[condor]

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

.. I am talking from a wildlife shooter's perspective. One who has shot wildlife for years using 'slow' f/5.6 lenses.

Nilanjan, my 2c - a slow lens is still good enough for a stationary animal / bird, but when it comes to a bird in flight / animal on the move, then a faster lens would be better ? What's your thoughts on this ? Guess the bird-shooters would find more need for a faster lens, more than those who shoot animals ?

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by M35

The Sigma 150-600s are available here in China/Hong Kong.
The Contemporary variant is priced at close to the Tammy 150-600 where as the Sports variant way expensive, nearly double the price of that of the former.


Won’t it make more sense to go in with the Nikkor 300mm f4 prime + TC instead of the Siggy Sports ? I know the former doesn’t have VR but it’s a quality Nikkor prime glass.

Since I shoot animals, I prefer telezooms for flexibility e.g. for animalscapes, for those shots when the animal is coming pretty close. If I someday carry two bodies, I will opt for a long prime (with or without teleconverter) and a telezoom.

For birding - where closer is always better, and where you can never get close enough - a prime lens makes a lot more sense.

Originally Posted by condor

Nilanjan, my 2c - a slow lens is still good enough for a stationary animal / bird, but when it comes to a bird in flight / animal on the move, then a faster lens would be better ? What's your thoughts on this ? Guess the bird-shooters would find more need for a faster lens, more than those who shoot animals ?

Well, a faster lens would obviously be better in terms of image quality. Even for animals - more light coming in, that shallow depth of field, better lens. Given a choice and with right supporting gear, who wouldn't like to shoot with a 400mm f/2.8 or a 600mm f/4? But it would cost exponentially more, and would be far heavier. There is a tradeoff here.

Check out the price and weight of the 200-400 f/4 lenses - vs say the 80-400mm f/5.6 or the 100-400mm f/5.6.

You need to decide what works for you and how much you are willing to spend. When I upgrade, my choices will be constrained by what I can spend. I will try to optimize based on budget, my shooting style and my experience.

Note: the 'right' gear also depends on where one is going, what one is shooting, vehicle type etc. There is an interesting article by Thom Hogan about choice of gear for wildlife: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/...on-versus.html

Edit: a comment specific to the Tamron: what VFM alternative is there to get to 600mm and same IQ? That's the key question - not whether another fast long lens could be better. Better, of course - but at what cost?

[Divya Sharan]

I hope this is not OT, I didn't find a relevant thread hence posting here.

I have a Nikon D3200. I shoot ONLY in RAW mode, that is .NEF files. I use Adobe's DNG converter or Lightroom 5.4 to export pics in JPEG format.
But, after every session, I find that at least 20/100 clicks show the following error:

In Lightroom - There was an error working with the photo.
In DNG - Reached an unexpected end of file.

I was so pissed yesterday that I clicked a lovely eagle in flight and I got the errors on that very pic!
P.S - My pics are never in read-only mode (on the PC), so permissions are ruled out.

What is the actual problem here?

[tasuray]

Thanks Nilanjan for your opinion. You are right, choice of equipments always depends on your requirements and budget. Frankly speaking I can not afford Nikor 800 mm prime which is costlier than a Honda City car. As per reviews Sigma 150-600mm is almost 3kgs. of weight where as Tamron is almost 2kgs.(1990 gms). Sigma (S) variant is also very expensive. So,handling and VFM both are in favour of Tamron 150-600mm. Moreover Sigma just officially launches the said lens, nobody knows when it will come to Indian market for sale. Built quality of Tamron is also solid as per the reviews, though I have never felt that Tamron's lenses are bad in quality. One should not compare Nikon or Canon professional quality lenses with Tamron, keeping in view the price tags.
Thanks.

[M35]

Nikon D7100 or a D610 ?

[tasuray]

Originally Posted by M35

Nikon D7100 or a D610 ?

Nikon D610 anyday.
Nikon D7100 is a DX i.e. cropped sensor body but Nikon D610 is a FX i.e. full format body (equivalent to 35 mm format). FX is always better than DX.

[ajay_satpute]

Originally Posted by tasuray

FX is always better than DX.

Even though I agree that FX produces better pics (better DOF, etc...) than a DX. However, IMHO, we can not make such a flat statement. "Better" is a relative term and just the camera type does not guarantee "better" output. There are so many parameters that decide the final output, whether its a DX or FX.

I believe that a decision of choosing between an FX and a DX camera, should be based on the usage and seriousness towards photography. If its just a hobby, I would suggest a DX (7100, even D5300 is a great camera). If you are really serious about your photography and may be moving towards a professional/commercial purpose, then FX is the way.

Whatever I have said above, are not thumb rules, but are conventions. Finally, your budget and your heart decides what you buy.

All the best !

[NetfreakBombay]

Interesting observation :

[sindabad.sailor]

Ordered DSLR Canon 1200D with dual lens kit , 8gb card and some sort of camera bag for 26.9 K with 2.5K cashback by December 15. Total landing cost would be 24.5K which is way cheaper than minimum price of 30K OTC at local shops in my town.
Now awaiting delivery in a week and hoping that the camera would come with Canon's 2 yrs India warranty as advertised.
Earlier on Flipkart, missed same at price point of 25.9K with 1.5K cashback. But difference in cashback would make up for the difference in price.