9 out of 10 points and recommendedsharp, fast AF, ok IS efficiency , good distortion control, good build.CA at wide end, the Tamorn is actually sharper.
I 've got 3 copies of this lens and 4 copies of Tamorn 17-50f2.8 and I think the Tamorn is a better lens optically , lesser amount of CA , lesser amount of vignetting seen at wide end but the Canon has better AF and IS so in real life, the Canon produces more boring but more reliable results.reviewed December 1st, 2008 (purchased for $800)
Usually when light gets really low , I use this lens since this lens AF super accurately and its IS is effective not as effective as the IS in the 24-105f4L or 70-200f4LIS though.
In day light I prefer my EF17-40f4L or the Tamorn since I think the 17-40F4L has better color rendition and tonality than this expensive EF-S and the Tamorn is actually the sharpest of all 3 , in fact the Tamorn beats the Nikon AF-S17-55f2.8G DX too , I had a couple of copies of the Nikon AF-S17-55f2.8DX and I returned both.
I have a couple of AF-S16-85VR too and it is a bit sharper than the AF-S17-55 f2.8DX but the Canon EF-S17-55f2.8ISUSM is a bit sharper than the 2 Nikon DX lenses, with better distortion control, but the 16-85VR has more effective VR than the IS in this particular Canon lens.
In general though, the Nikon VR is less effective than Canon IS , the most effective IS I can think of is the IS in the new EF-S18-200IS and now , I mostly use the 18-200IS with the excellent Canon EF-S10-22USM on my 50D and 40D.
All in all , this EF-S17-55f2.8IS is an excellent lens if you do not mind its short reach and CA at the wide end of it , but if you do think you will go for a full frame soon or you prefer a smaller and lighter lens than this bulky lens , there is always the Tamorn and EF17-40f4L both of them are optically excellent too, though the Canon has the faster AF, all of them are better and much cheaper than the Nikon AF-S17-55f2.8DX any way.
I highly recommend it for people like low light stuff and event work or street photography at dusk.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedthe IS in this lens is the most effective IS, sharp at 200mm, good colors.CA at wide end , distortion at 18mm, a bit too bulky for what it is.
I highly recommend this lens as a light weight travel lens for all 50D users if you can get it as a part of the 50D kit.reviewed December 1st, 2008 (purchased for $500)
As I got it a part of my 50D kit in Japan , I saved lots of money, I bought my 50D with this lens for about 1300USD, so I think it is a good lens for the price and range.
I had the Sigma OS lens before and I hated it and returned it and I bought a Nikon D300 just for the famous Nikon Af-S18-200VR DX lens and the light weight and fantastically sharp AF-S70-300VR lens and I really loved all of these Nikon gears.
Now , Canon's also got this super zoom , so I wanted to buy it for myself and compare it to my Nikon Af-S18-200Vr , I think the Canon lens is a bit sharper , espeically at 200mm it , but the Nikon lens handles CA at wide end a bit better(even without the D300 in-camera CA control tool).
With the DPP3.51,the Canon lens has no light fall off with my 50D and with the NX2, the Nikon lens has no CA with my D300.
So I think both super zooms are really good for what it is, but 18mm on a 1.6X Canon body is not wide enough , so for a 1.6X Canon ,I usually need a EF-S10-22 with this EF-S18-200IS lens for travel but with my D300 , I just use the 18-200Vr or 16-85Vr with the cheap but sharp AF 85f1.8D and no need wider than the 18mm end of the AF-S18-200Vr or the 16mm end of the AF-S16-85VR , so I prefer traveling with my d300 when I have to travel light.
With that said, this Canon lens is a keeper , and as it is optimized for EF-S sensor cameras , it is quite sharp on my 50D , maybe a bit sharper than the EF-S55-250IS at 200mm(this lens is sharp at 200mm even wide open) , so considering the range and size , it is a good lens , no doubt about it and it is not as slow AF ing as some might think even without the RING USM.
I am more and more using this lens with EF-S10-22 or EF-28f1.8USM and leaving my EF-S17-55f2.8, EF70-200f4LIS and 70-300DO at my home , now I am considering selling my 70-200f4LIS since 200mm is not long enough most of times when I need a tele zoom and the white barrel is really annoying. The L is a very sharp lens though, some times , I need to be inconspicuous.
NOTE: in this digital era , a bit of distortion, color contrast or vignetting is not a serious issue and thus, the most important part of IQ now is resolving power , and thus, it is a great lens for what it is designed to do.
I know many L snobs say this is a junk lens but I guess they never ever shoot in Burma or Cambodia with a white lens , to see how the local people there react to their white Ls.
UPDATE: after posted this one , I read the previous poster's trashing this lens , and I thought he probably never used this lens in real life or he just got a bad copy. In any case , this lens is much better than that , it's AF very fast ,at least as fast as any other consumer grade lens in this price range and actually faster AFing than the Nikon super zoom , which I also have had for about 4 months.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedvery sharp, very corrected wide end, very good color rendering, small .Vignetting at wide end wide open.
I think this lens is just outstanding , extremely sharp and extremely versatile.reviewed December 1st, 2008 (purchased for $600)
The best light weight travel lens for my D300 , D80 and D90.
I had 2 copies of the aF-S17-55f2.8DX and this AF-S16-85VR is much sharper at coners and edges.
I think f2.8 zooms are expensive because it's faster and usually had better build. etc, not because it is sharper than a consumer lens in similar range.
And in real life the VR2 beats the f2.8 any time unless your subject is moving fast in low light, but in real low light , f2.8 is not fast enough to stop motion blur any way, get a this lens or a Tamorn 17-50f2.8 with some primes , the af-S17-55f2.8Dx is expensive but not sharper than this lens or the good copy of the Tamorn.
I still think, with its great range and VR2 , this lens is the best in this range in any mount, even better than the 24-105f4LIS on a 5D.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedsmall, sharper than both Nikon and Canon similar lenses, better CA handling than the Canon version.slower AF than the Canon version and Nikon version.
I bought 4 of them and all of them are sharper than a few copies of the Nikon17-55f2.8DX(already sold) and Canon EF-S17-55f2.8IS(still own 2 copies of the Canon) that I have used.reviewed December 2nd, 2008 (purchased for $280)
Unless you need an extremely fast AF in low light, you better off trying this lens fast before buying the super over priced Canon or Nikon version, this lens is optically better than both Nikon and Canon similar lenses , with less CA , more flare resistance and sharper corner from f4.
But to be honest , for Canon users , I recommend the Canon one although it is less sharp than this Tammy because the Canon has the IS and AF much faster in low light.
For Nikon guys though , I recommend this Tammy, it is sharper than the over priced , bulky Nikon 17-55DX , and I found this lens AF very well on my D300 , not so on my 50D or 40D though.
Any one say any Canon or Nikon is sharper than this fantastically sharp Tamorn, is a kind of guy just having to justify his expensive lens purchase or just third party hater with prejudice aginst Tamron.
Many say ,only if you cannot afford the Canon or Nikon , you may be happy with this lens or it is just good for the price , no regardless of price it is better for many people who prefer a smaller and sharper lens for landscapes or mostly shooting in day light , thus , no need for the IS.
I decided to keep this lens actually 2 copies for my D300 , 1 for my 450D , for light weight travel or walk around stuff , but in low light , I use the Canon EF-S17-55f2.8ISUSM because of the IS and FTM(if this Tamron gets the Tamron VC and USM AF, I will get it in a heart beat and sell my Canon17-55f2.8).
IF you shoot mostly in dim light or night scene , go for the Canon for its IS and USM , the lens is superb in low light and I think the 50D and EF-S17-55f2.8IS combo makes the ultimate low light,APS-C kit. But other wise , you dont need to waste your money on the bulky lens like the Ef-S17-55f2.8IS or Nikon Af-S17-55f2.8DX.
This lens is a real bargain , it is sharper than the AF-S17-55f2.8DX , EF-S17-55f2.8IS , EF24-105f4LIS , EF24-70f2.8LUSM, Sigma 18-50f2.8macro HSM, EF17-40f4LUSM, as sharp as the AF-S16-85VR.
I mostly use this lens and AF-S16-85VR on my D300 when I travel light.
And I think this Tamron is built very well , looks cheap but it is durable , I abuse it quite badly and it is still like just out of a box.
And even if it breaks , who cares? it is so cheap and easy to replace but if I break the Nikon 17-55Dx , it will be expensive to fix , Nikon charges a lot for that.
3 out of 10 points and not recommendedsharp at f5.6 , good color contrast, fast AF, built well.CACACA, vignetting , not sharp wide open.
The AF-S16-85VR is a better lens with much smaller barrel and VR2.reviewed December 2nd, 2008 (purchased for $1,400)
The VR kills f2.8 any time , unless your subject is not moving fast in low light.
The 17-55f2.8 is clearly over priced , compared to the much sharper Canon EF-S17-55f2.8IS or Tamron 17-50f2.8 , it is clear.
This lens does not even have the Nikon's excellent VR2 at this price , is amazing , what a rip off ?
I did not say this just after trying a copy of this lens , but 4 copies of it compared to the excellent Tamorn 17-50f2.8 and I found the both Tamorn and Canon versions are better optically, the Canon even got very effective IS and AF much faster than this Nikon lens...............
I think this lens will soon be replaced with a new VR version of it, I dont think this is the best Nikon can do.
I also hate the 12-24f4DX, which is a useless lens too , and over priced , it is much more expensive than the much better Canon EF-S10-22USM.
What are you thinking Nikon?
You bodies are great , but LENSES are much more important than bodies cause lenses stay with me longer than any body I use now.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedSharpest lens I ever used, fast AF, FTM, very well built lens, great color rendition.none.
I think this is the best Nikon lens .PERIOD.reviewed December 2nd, 2008 (purchased for $560)
This is sharper than anything else , I hope Nikon makes all lenses this good , the new Nikon lenses released in this year were all so good , so they should make the orver priced unsharp 17-55f2.8DX as good as the 16-85Vr or this one with Nano Crystal coating.
I hope Nikon will replace the 85f1.8 with SWM and Nano Crystal coating , the 85f1.8 and 1.4 are both already very good lenses though.
Forgot to tell you this lens works great on the D3 at my work , my personal camera is the D300 and D90 , but I think this lens works better with the D3 with more beautiful bokeh than I can get with DX body.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedfast AF, very compact , verysharp, very cool color , almost distortion-free.CA .
best bargain lens if you need this forcal length.reviewed December 4th, 2008 (purchased for $300)
it is sharper than most of other lenses , I also have used the Nikon 85f1.8D and I think both are good but the Canon AF is much better due to its Ring USM.
I dont see any reason to pay a lot more for the 1.2L2 lens when this cheap lens is so good already.
the best candid street lens IMHO.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedgood color and contrast , great flare resistance , sharper than the Sigma.nothing.
I was forced to buy the Sigma 10-20EX about a year a go when I was going to Ayuttaya for a kind of work shooting temples there because the dealor I usually deal with did not have this Canon at the night........reviewed December 4th, 2008 (purchased for $650)
So , I was shooting with the Sigma for about a year but always hated the lens , heavy, built very poorly and colors are too warm.
In lAst week, I bought this Canon lens as I knew I liked it better and did some compariosn , I would say this lens is outstanding , it does not extend itself while zooming or AFing, the USM is better than the HSM, the Canon lens produces more neutral color a bit cooler than most of other lenses but I do like it(I hate warm colors).
It's also very resistant to flares, I love this lens.
This is absolutely the best UWA in Canon mount and it is actually a much better lens than the Nikon 12-24DX or Tokina 11-16f2.8 , with better flare resistance and faster aF.
This lens usually trashed for its light weight design barrel but it is very well built , and most of people bash its build quality are usually these old fashioned people believing in the heavier and more metal used lens the better they are, dont listen to them.
PLASTIC is more durable than metal in real life , when I was shooting in Cambodia ,I dropped a few lenses from my car and all lenses died from the drop were these well regarded metal barreled expensive lenses, all my light weight lenses survived.
Dont judge a lens build quality by its appearance or superficial feel of it .
10 out of 10 points and recommendedgreat sharp lens , very well corrected , very low CA, AF fast enough.slower than the Canon 85f1.8 in terms of AF, flare more than the Canon.
I like its size and AF speed as a screw driven lens.reviewed December 4th, 2008 (purchased for $370)
I think this lens is quite sharp wide open and well corrected almost distortion free lens.
Its only one weakness is the flare control, its color and contrast are good , almost no CA even wide open.
This lens is small , fast , sharp and makes my D300 looks so small , I love it , I think this lens is a better lens than the f1.4D if you like street photography or sharp corners as SLRGERA.com this very site says.
One of these best bargain lenses in Nikon world.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedgood IQ , with very high resolution , good wideopen perf, almost no CA.a bit slow AF, harsh bokeh
on my D300 , it is slower to focus than my 35f2D or 85f1.8D, but on a D80 or 90 , it is a bit faster lens than these screw-driven primes.reviewed December 10th, 2008 (purchased for $350)
it is sharp wide open , it is very bright with good contrast , and I see almost no CA at atll.
bokeh is not so good a bit harsh compared to the excellent Sigma , but for my use candid street shots , I think it is good enough and more importantly, I love the size of it , it is very inconspicuous and makes my D300 look very compact , now I go out with my D300 withou hesitation.
this is what I was waiting for for a long time , thanks Nikon , this time you got it.
now, you should design an AF-S35f1.8G and AF-S85f1.8G, no need for a huge f1.4 prime , but make it small and inconspicuous with high resolving power like this one or the AF-S60f2.8G, if the 60 was f1.8G ,it would be the perfect lens for me though.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedSWM , exceptional flare resistance, sharp at 200mm, not much CA to worry about.bad barrel distortion , soft at 18mm .
for a super zoom , it is exceptionally sharp , my copy beats my AF-S17-55f2.8 DX at 55mm , but the pro zoom is much sharper at 18mm.reviewed December 21st, 2008 (purchased for $500)
I also compared it to the Tamron 17-50f2.8 and Sigma 17-70DC , suprisingly though, this lens was not much worse then all others , the Tamorn was the sharpest of all in this zoom range group but with serious CA issue, the Sigma came very close second , the AF-S16-85VR was the next , the AF-S17-55f2.8DX was the last.
Now move on to tele range of it , I compared this lens at 200 mm and 135mm against 3 lenses , Nikon Af-S70-300VR , Canon EF70-200f4LISUSM , Canon EF70-300DOISUSM.
The Canon L was the easily the sharpest of all my lenses , with the Canon 60macro and Nikon AF-S200f2VR, but the AF-S18-200Vr was not at all bad , it was a bit sharper than I thought it would be at 200 mm , it was a bit softer than the AF-S70-300VR at the same focal range but not much.
Oh , I almost forgot to write about this , I also tested the Sigma 18-200OS at 200 mm and Tamorn 18-270VC at 200 mm agaist this one and of course the Canon EF-S18-200IS.
All in all, the Nikon one is the best super zoom of all these 4 , though as SLR says , it is a bit less sharp than the Tamorn and Canon.
This Nikon 18-200VR's got better flare resistance ,lesser CA and better color-contrast than all other super zooms I have compared it to, combined it with its excellent SWM and FTM , it is a winner although I sold it for the new 50f1.4G and 85f1.8D(cause I love a small prime more than a big zoom).
I think as I get a bit of money in next month , I will re-buy it for my D80 and I will sell the Canon eF-S18-200IS ,which is a too heavy lens for a this kind of super convinient zoom.
I like the Canon zoom lock sytem , but it is a bit too big. And I can not FTM it although it AF fast enough for almost anything I shoot including a running dog.
So , I highly recommend this lens and the Tamorn 18-270VC over the Canon eF-S18-200IS and Sigma 18-200OS.
Oh , if you want to get it , just get it as a part of a D90 kit or D300 kit like me , you will save a lot of money.
8 out of 10 points and recommendedrange , weight , optical-quality-as-superzoom.slow-AF.
I have Canon EF-S18-200IS and Nikon AF-S18-200VR and this one got from my mom.reviewed February 22nd, 2009
I did not like it cause it is slow on my XSI , it is fast or fast enough on my 50D though , I dont need a superzoom for a camera like 50D or 5D2 so I returned it.
Optically, this lens is sharper than both Canon and Nikon that I have compared to this lens.
But most of times shooting action , the Canon wins with much faster AF and much higher keeper rate.
I think this one is a bit shaper than my AF-S18-200Vr at tele end but the Nikon beats it at wide end.
The Nikon vignettes more than this one but this one shows more CA, maybe because my D300 automatically correct CA of the Nikon lenses but not Tammy.
Oh well, I returned the Canon version of this one but I kept the Nikon version for now, but I think I will keep the Nikkor over this since the VR is better than the VC.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedshapest 50 for sure, no-CA I can see, very fast aF on my 50D and D300.no-canon-or-nikon-so-cheap-resell-value.
this repalced my EF50f1.4USM and Nikon aF-S50f1.4G.reviewed February 22nd, 2009 (purchased for $430)
much sharper than these 2 and much faster aF than both Cand N.
So get it if you have Nikon D700, EOS5D2, EOS50D or Nikon D300, but not get it if you have a D90 or D80 cause I tried it on my D90 (returned) and was not good on it cause slow AF and horrible metering of the D90, it is outstandingly sharp on my d300 with its 51 AF though.
Sigma rocks for now.
update: I forgot to mention this , the Sigma was sharper than the 50f1.2L too.
8 out of 10 points and recommendedcheap, sharper than the D, good colors and contrast.look and feel very lousy, very slow AF compared to real ring USM on my Canon
hey, goldeniggy, you shouldn`t have bought it from Yodobashi.reviewed April 17th, 2009 (purchased for $220)
you know it is much cheaper if you get it at Kitamura or Sampou camera and there are many many places you can bargain.
if you know how to bargain ,there is no place you buy any lens cheaper than Tokyo or Osaka.
next time you buy a lens locally ,get the cheapest price for it and with it , you go to a Kitamura or Map camera or like that and bargain it, they will know you know the price and they will discount it.
You should go to kakaku.com before buying any lens in Japan cause they dont give you real local price (like in HK)unless you show them that you the cheapest price for any lens u want to buy.
As for the lens , IMHO, I like the older D version better , since my D300 AF faster with it than this one, I like this new G for its ultimate sharpness but it requires me to PP more because of the serious distortion and CA.
I think if you use D300 and up, then no need this but other wise , it is a good walk around prime makes my D90 so small.
Note : the AFD AF faster on a pro body or semi pro body, but on a D90 it is faster than the D version.