Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 18, 2006, 11:14 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

Ok, I am new to this and I am having trouble getting the image attached.

The new Tamron SP 17-50 f2.8 is a very nice lens. I wanted to replace my KM 18-70 Kit lens and had been looking for some time. I was concerned about the Sigma 18-50 EX 2.8 because of reported focusing problem. I was roaming the Internet the other night (Nov 12th) and found the Tammy 17-50 IN STOCK at B&H. Could this be? Everyone was saying that the Minolta mount was still not shipping. I did an ADD TO CART, got the email confirmation, and now the lens. B&H is currently showing Accepting Orders and that it is out of stock. It even showed out of stock 5 minutes after I palced the order??

This lens is light, compact, and fast. It has good build quality, a metal mount, but plastic otherwise. The zoom ring is smooth and does not creap. Manual focus ring is wide and usable. The focus is spot on! No focus problems with this lens. Color saturation is good and the lens is SHARP. Very Sharp. The Bokeh is smooth and the f2.8 helps.

I will try to get some samples attached or a link for those who are interested.
MaxImage is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 19, 2006, 9:24 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

Here is a link to some additional shots with the new Tamron 17-50 2.8. I am very pleased with this lens. Your comments please.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/?saved=1
MaxImage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2006, 9:31 PM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'm suprised the forums software let you attach an image that big. It's usually a good idea to downsize an image to around 640 to 720 pixels wide before trying it.

Attaching anything much larger than that makes it difficult to read the threads (since it makes the entire thread wider, requiring users to scroll left and right to see the text, especially at lower resolution settings). I'm not sure what the resolution cutoff is. But, I would have expected the software to reject an image that large.

See Steve's post about image size here:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...amp;forum_id=2

Anyway, I love the first photo in your online album (PICT0025). The colors and composition are super.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2006, 9:43 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

Sorry about the large image. I see what you mean. It does make the thread difficult to read. It seems that posting a link is better.

The ISO for the first photo was 800, I just changed this. Thanks for your comments.
MaxImage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2006, 9:53 PM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Or, just downsize them first.

I typically use Irfanview for upsizing or downsizing images. It's a free tool with lots of uses:

http://www.irfanview.com

I usually make mine somewhere between 640 and 720 pixels wide.

To use it for resizing, simply open an image using File>Open.

Then, use the menu choice you'll find for Image>Resize/Resample

Click the "Set New Size" box, make the width around 640 to 720 pixels wide, with the "Preserve Aspect Ratio" box checked (so that it keeps the same dimensions of width to height) and click OK.

Then, use the File>Save As menu choice and give it a new name so that you don't overwrite your original. I'd make sure the file type is JPEG, and set the Image Quality slider you'll see to around 84% to make sure it's small enough for posting (images will need to about 240KB or smaller for posting here).

If your web hosting service allows direct linking, the file size restrictions won't apply, since you can use the button on the text entry toolbar to embed the images instead of attaching them (so the forums software won't care how large the file is). It's still a good idea to make sure they're downsized for display purposes.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2006, 10:21 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

I downloaded the resizing tool and thought I would try attaching a resized image. Thanks for your help.:-)
Attached Images
 
MaxImage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2006, 10:35 PM   #7
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

It's one of my favorite tools. That image looks like it barely made the filesize restrictions. So, you may have to use a slightly lower JPEG Quality setting (the slider you'll see come up when using File>Save As) for some images for the forum software to take them.

BTW, it can also resize in batch mode. See this old post for details:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=31



JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 24, 2006, 2:29 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
MINOLTANUT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 807
Default

APERATURE IS YOUR FREIND..DEPTH OF FIELD IS A GOOD THING
MINOLTANUT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 8, 2006, 9:42 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 323
Default

Hi MaxImage,



You have had your Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 for a few weeks now and presumably you have performed further evaluation of it. What is your opinion now? Would you recommend this lens?



I'm looking to replace/augment my KM 28-75mm f/2.8 – it's a nice lens but I find that the wide end is not wide enough. The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 looks like a perfect fit.



Thanks,



FrankD
FrankD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 8, 2006, 10:06 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

FrankD wrote:
Quote:
Hi MaxImage,



You have had your Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 for a few weeks now and presumably you have performed further evaluation of it. What is your opinion now? Would you recommend this lens?



I'm looking to replace/augment my KM 28-75mm f/2.8 – it's a nice lens but I find that the wide end is not wide enough. The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 looks like a perfect fit.



Thanks,



FrankD
Though it's a slight overlap, the 17-50mmwould work great paired with a 35-105mm 2.8 Tamron for those moments when carrying two lenses is a viable option.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:02 PM.