I don't know Kid, but I have the Tamron 17mm f3.5 and it's the best rectilinear ultra wide angle lens I ever used, but you need to make sure you buy it with the dedicated rubber hood to avoid flare which were an optional extra at the time because to buy it later on eBay they want megabucks for them and the with the latest model the filters screw into the hood not the lens.I wonder how it rates compared to the Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 ?
I don't know Kid, but I have the Tamron 17mm f3.5 and it's the best rectilinear ultra wide angle lens I ever used, but you need to make sure you buy it with the dedicated rubber hood to avoid flare which were an optional extra at the time because to buy it later on eBay they want megabucks for them and the with the latest model the filters screw into the hood not the lens.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tamron-SP...420800?hash=item4645a919c0:g:~IwAAOSwwE5WYlGd
Why were lenses sold without appropriate shades anyway?
I just read a german magazine article from the 80s putting up this issue.
To maximise profits, why do you think?Why were lenses sold without appropriate shades anyway?
I just read a german magazine article from the 80s putting up this issue.
My Tamron SP 17mm came with the dedicated hood. Mine is the first edition (built in filters). I guess I should take it out and give it a spin....
It's one of the best 17mm rectilinear ultra wide angle lenses ever made I prefer it to the Canon FD 17mm lens.How do you like your Tamron 17mm?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?