About
All Feedback (258)
ruguoa (3122)- Feedback left by buyer.
Past year
Verified purchase
Thank you very much for your support and purchase, perfect buyer, immediately gave 5 stars positiv feedback, hope to do business with you again！
oz_splendid (120155)- Feedback left by buyer.
More than a year ago
Verified purchase
Good buyer, prompt payment, valued customer, highly recommended.
super_lighting (70312)- Feedback left by buyer.
More than a year ago
Verified purchase
Good buyer, prompt payment, valued customer, highly recommended.
buymarket (30935)- Feedback left by buyer.
More than a year ago
Verified purchase
Good buyer, prompt payment, valued customer, highly recommended.
swoows (265056)- Feedback left by buyer.
More than a year ago
Verified purchase
Good buyer, prompt payment, valued customer, highly recommended.
Reviews (3)
29 April 2018
Good quality metal vented hood
08 June 2012
Fantastic fast f2.8 lens producing sharp clear photos. Value for money.
1 of 1 found this helpful I love this lens. It produces great sharp photos and importantly is a fast f2.8 lens across the zoom range, which was one of the main features I was looking for to replace my kit lens. It feels well built and has a metal mount as opposed to my kit lens. It's autofocus motor is relatively noisy and not as fast as the top USM mechanisms found on more expensive lenses, which isn't an issue for me. I'm on a budget, and came across it on ebay by chance at an affordable price, and as my birthday was coming up, it was a perfect opportunity. I did a lot of research on the lens and comparable lenses, notably the VC version of the same lens, from various respected review sites and respected photographers, whose in-depth reviews and sample photos gave much food for thought. In the end, it came down to the newer stabilised version (VC) or this non-stabilised version, with a $100 price difference.
For my needs, I wanted it to be sharp for as much of the frame as possible, and this lens despite it being cheaper at AUS$340 edged out the other lenses, of which the Canon wasn't a contender due to it being very expensive and poor value for money at around $1000 and not any better than the Tamron in picture quality though it had image stabilisation and a better autofocus motor. In the end, the reviews showed the newer VC lens was not as sharp overall and had considerable softness issues on the edges at large apertures which I couldn't accept as the low-light feature was one of the main considerations. At first I thought the sample closeups at f2.8 near the edges couldn't be right, but the full samples of test targets confirmed it. If you're only concerned with the subject in the centre, that might not be such an issue, and some field-test shots were very good where the focus was towards the centre anyway, so maybe test targets are too hard on the lens as compared to real-life usage. For things like product shots or any decent lighting condition you can use a higher f-stop where it isn't much of an issue. But for my usage, which include making mural panoramas, overall sharpness is important and I don't want to be hampered by having to watch my aperture and worry about it. I have done plenty of fairly low-light shots without stabilisation by using a proper stance, arms close to the body, and holding my breath, or leaning against objects, and for night photography I use a tripod anyway, so I knew while stabilisation is a nice feature, it wasn't critical for my work.
Recently I've tested it out on night photography during the Vivid light festival in Sydney, which features a lot of light sculptures scattered around the city and buildings lit up, notably the Opera House and Museum of Modern Art, and I've gotten some fantastic results where its key benefits of high aperture and sharpness has come in good stead. I am very pleased both with our new camera and this Tamron lens, which is my walkaround lens that only comes off to use the 55-250mm zoom.
07 January 2017
Cordless crap
1 of 1 found this helpful This is a scam. It is cheap plastic with a 1-ohm resistor inside which does absolutely nothing to prevent electrostatic discharge. Without grounding, there is nowhere for the charge to go. It is worse than wearing nothing, because it gives the user a false sense of being protected and is likely to make the user careless and accidentally destroy what they are working on.