Comments on: Tamron 17-50 vs Nikon 17-55 http://www.cyberward.net/blog/2009/06/tamron-17-50-vs-nikon-17-55/ The Drive Failures and Shutter Clicks of Christopher Ward Tue, 27 Jul 2010 03:00:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Darrell http://www.cyberward.net/blog/2009/06/tamron-17-50-vs-nikon-17-55/comment-page-1/#comment-2553 Darrell Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:49:12 +0000 http://www.cyberward.net/blog/?p=1353#comment-2553 Ha ha! I just went on, didn't I? No, I didn't get that impression at all. Actually, I meant to say that the Sigma pretty much is the same with your Tamrom - the focus speed is rather slow. I'd like to think also that it doesn't help with the 3 mode metering system of the D40x - that is one of my biggest pet peeve (that's why I shoot only manual) and also the fact that the ISO rating is horrible at around 800 and up. I guess what I was saying was that I had to compensate for those things and sometimes, you're absolutely right, there might be a situation where you just can't use it. So what I was saying, without trying to contradict myself was the reason that I needed to upgrade to a better camera is to get one with a better ISO rating. See, with film I never had that problem. I just buy faster film. But with digital you're pretty much stuck with it and actually have to upgrade to an entirely new camera. Thanks for the comment Chris. Ha ha! I just went on, didn’t I? No, I didn’t get that impression at all. Actually, I meant to say that the Sigma pretty much is the same with your Tamrom – the focus speed is rather slow. I’d like to think also that it doesn’t help with the 3 mode metering system of the D40x – that is one of my biggest pet peeve (that’s why I shoot only manual) and also the fact that the ISO rating is horrible at around 800 and up. I guess what I was saying was that I had to compensate for those things and sometimes, you’re absolutely right, there might be a situation where you just can’t use it. So what I was saying, without trying to contradict myself was the reason that I needed to upgrade to a better camera is to get one with a better ISO rating. See, with film I never had that problem. I just buy faster film. But with digital you’re pretty much stuck with it and actually have to upgrade to an entirely new camera.

Thanks for the comment Chris.

]]> By: Chris Ward http://www.cyberward.net/blog/2009/06/tamron-17-50-vs-nikon-17-55/comment-page-1/#comment-2552 Chris Ward Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:56:18 +0000 http://www.cyberward.net/blog/?p=1353#comment-2552 I hope you didn't get the impression from my blog that I think the equipment makes the shooter, but it can make the shot :-) My biggest complaint with the Tamron is the focus speed. I find myself missing shots when things are moving fast. I felt the Nikon kept up with me. I shot with a D40 before the D90, and moved up mostly for the extra ISO ability and the extra controls on the body. If/when I move again it will be for similar reasons. Glad the Sigma is working out for you. I chose the Tamron over it because I heard of several people that had poor copies. But then my Tamron ended up being a bad copy too. You are right that good lighting equipment goes a long way. Sometimes you can't use it though. I hope you didn’t get the impression from my blog that I think the equipment makes the shooter, but it can make the shot :-) My biggest complaint with the Tamron is the focus speed. I find myself missing shots when things are moving fast. I felt the Nikon kept up with me. I shot with a D40 before the D90, and moved up mostly for the extra ISO ability and the extra controls on the body. If/when I move again it will be for similar reasons. Glad the Sigma is working out for you. I chose the Tamron over it because I heard of several people that had poor copies. But then my Tamron ended up being a bad copy too. You are right that good lighting equipment goes a long way. Sometimes you can’t use it though.

]]> By: Darrell http://www.cyberward.net/blog/2009/06/tamron-17-50-vs-nikon-17-55/comment-page-1/#comment-2551 Darrell Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:43:26 +0000 http://www.cyberward.net/blog/?p=1353#comment-2551 I have the Sigma 17-55 2.8 HSM and it works really well. Believe it or not, I shoot with a D40X and have done numerous weddings, portraits as well as promotional stuff and cd covers for local bands. Before that, I was basically a film guy. I'm a strong believer in the camera as being just a tool - - the rest is up to me. I would love to actually get a Canon 5D and all Canon lenses, but I have some limitations called money. So for now, I'll stick with my Nikon. I've made sure however, that i've learned every aspect of this camera, and its limitations and have worked around it. I think with a good lighting gear you can do just about anything. Of course, it's good to know how to use it. Great blog. I have the Sigma 17-55 2.8 HSM and it works really well. Believe it or not, I shoot with a D40X and have done numerous weddings, portraits as well as promotional stuff and cd covers for local bands. Before that, I was basically a film guy. I’m a strong believer in the camera as being just a tool – - the rest is up to me. I would love to actually get a Canon 5D and all Canon lenses, but I have some limitations called money. So for now, I’ll stick with my Nikon. I’ve made sure however, that i’ve learned every aspect of this camera, and its limitations and have worked around it. I think with a good lighting gear you can do just about anything. Of course, it’s good to know how to use it.

Great blog.

]]>