PDA

View Full Version : Arrghhh...new lens blues!



Moparmike
May 12th, 2010, 08:44
Well, I've been spending some time with my new Tammy 17-50 on the DL. So far, haven't had many sunny days to play with it outdoors but for cloudy day shooting, so far I'm not real impressed.

It seems pretty consistent about underexposing compared to the meter reading on the camera. And is usually 0.5-1.0 stop under my DA18-55 kit lens.
Here's a couple of shots from this morning...it was almost sunny (light overcast).

Indoors with the flash, it also has a tendency to underexpose just a hair but nothing as exaggerated as outdoors on cloudy days.

Both shots taken in manual, 1/350s @ f9.5, in-camera meter @ 0.0, RAW converted to JPEG and resized, no PP.
First is the kit lens, second is the Tammy.
I didn't have my DA50-200 or either of my 50mm primes to compare it with...need to set those up side by side as well.

Ferry,
I know you've got this same lens...is this a problem on your rig too?

Ferry_vO
May 12th, 2010, 09:17
Can't really tell Mike, as I haven't done a direct comparison with my Canon 17-85. The Tamron is used mainly for indoor shooting (Which it does pretty well) and the Canon I use more outside on sunny days. Canon bodies do have a slight tendency to overexpose, especially with artificial lightning.

Moparmike
May 12th, 2010, 14:35
TY for the feedback.
Yup, I kinda like the lens for indoor work so far. I haven't played with the Tammy yet in low existing light but for flash I can't complain. (I'm not the best flash shooter though!)

As a general rule, my DL has a tendency to "expose to the left" if I stick with the auto modes. If I run manual, the meter is pretty well spot on with both the DA18-55 or the DA50-200 and with my primes.
Not sure if it's a problem with the body or not...from what I've read it seems to be a trait of the Pentax auto-modes to run a bit underexposed for the sake of reducing blown highlights with their other models too.

The Tamron, indoors with bounce flash...
1/60s @ f4.5, EV+1
100% crop and the original resized.
I did add a 5% unsharpmask to the crop since it was a little soft. I thought it did a nice job with the upholstery on my ratty couch though!

EasyEd
May 12th, 2010, 17:05
Hey All,

Mike Don't you think the first pictures would have been better if it were of say a Steiger built IH 4366 instead of a 7020 Deere? :bump:

Seriously though can your camera be made to adjust for the lens? Or do you just have to remember?

-Ed-

Moparmike
May 13th, 2010, 06:58
Hey All,

Mike Don't you think the first pictures would have been better if it were of say a Steiger built IH 4366 instead of a 7020 Deere? :bump:

Seriously though can your camera be made to adjust for the lens? Or do you just have to remember?

-Ed-


Yeah, yeah, yeah...I know...It was probably just that green paint giving my camera the fits. ;)
I've been stuck up at the apartment for a week and away from my "red power" at the farm. That 7020 has been setting abandoned near my workplace for years and I finally decided to snap some shots of it before it goes to the junkyard. (I remember it sitting in the same spot back when I was in high school 20 years ago so I doubt it's going anywhere real fast! LOL)
I'll snap some nice 806 pix the next time I go home!


There is no "per-lens" adjustment on the DL.
Besides this lens, I've got a cheap 28/f2.8 Vivitar that does some funky overexposing too. When I use that lens, I just have to remember to meter down and extra -0.5 with that one. I wasn't expecting much for a $5 lens so I can live with that.
I suppose I'll need to make a mental note how to set this new Tammy too.

And once I upgrade from my DL I'm sure I get to learn my lenses all over again too! I'm hoping to have a new K-X by the end of summer.

Moparmike
May 13th, 2010, 07:07
Hows this...
A bit older and a bit more "broke-in", but it still runs!


7711

Actually, this is one of the first shots I took with the Tammy 17-50, a couple days after I got it. It doesn't do too bad with some sunlight...it's just those cloudy shots that have been giving me fits!

EasyEd
May 13th, 2010, 17:14
Hey All,

That tractor is a full 10 years older I'd guess as it looks to me like a IH Farmall 560. The 7020 was early to mid 70s as I recall (I don't know Deere models that well).

As for the photo I like it and are you sure it isn't the paint? :d

-Ed-

Ferry_vO
May 14th, 2010, 11:09
Mike, after spending an overcast day at a museum I know what you mean. The clouds tend to show up overly bright, making the subject look too dark.

Overall the lens isn't too bad though; inside the f/2.8 works well (Combined with high ISO settings on the 7D) but for shooting 'outside only' I still prefer the Canon 17-85.

Two slightly editted shots with the Tamron 17-50:

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Ferror/Diversen/IMG_2779.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/Ferror/Diversen/IMG_2758.jpg

Kiwikat
May 14th, 2010, 15:54
Hows this...
A bit older and a bit more "broke-in", but it still runs!


7711

Actually, this is one of the first shots I took with the Tammy 17-50, a couple days after I got it. It doesn't do too bad with some sunlight...it's just those cloudy shots that have been giving me fits!

Nice tractor shot!

Do you shoot RAW or JPEG?

The tammy 17-50 is known to be one of the better general purpose lenses out there. But as with all lenses, there are some duds. Though Tamron is a lot more consistent than Sigma.

Moparmike
May 16th, 2010, 21:00
I've been doing mostly RAW with this lens. Actually, I've been doing more RAW and more manual with all my lenses trying to get my head "back in the game". Been suffering a bit of mental block lately.

That 560 Farmall was a JPEG in Av mode though...I just slapped the lens on and started burning random shots around the farmyard.

Overall, I really like the lens though. I am getting to know it a bit better so things are improving a bit.

Moparmike
May 16th, 2010, 21:02
I like that windmill shot Ferry!