Am I using my Tamron SP 17-50mm 2.8 wrong?

[lextalionis]

Alright a little background on my measly 5 months of DSLR experience. I first bought an XTi kit and shot it for a month before selling it and getting a 30D, Canon EF 100 2.8 macro and EF 50mm 1.8 "nifty fifty". I've used the 50mm some and with decent results, but I'm by far used the macro the most. I feel I've taken some decent macro shots (see for youself in my gallery). I sure hope that I just haven't a clue how to use my Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DiII LD Aspherical (IF) lens. I just picked up this lens second hand from an amature photographer here in Austin. While at the coffee shop I shot the below series (indoor and outdoor). I feel the results are adequate, do you?

One thing to note is that all of the images below were post-processed via RAW with Bibble Pro 4.9 with auto levels, some sharpening, some noise ninja. I noticed that there were more blown highlights than what I'm used to taking macro and thus I used "Highlight Recovery".

Hopefully someone can give me some ideas as to why my hike photos didn't turn out very good. I'm getting the feeling that wide angle photography generally requires higher f-stops, but it confuses me as to why you would want or desire a 2.8 fast wide angle?

Thanks in advance for commenting.

You can click on full resized images to see the full resolution image.

Resize iso 200 f4.5 1/1600sec 50mm



100% crop



Resize iso 200 f4.5 1/2000sec 17mm



100% crop



Resize iso 400 f4.5 1/80sec 50mm



100% crop



Resize iso 400 f4.5 1/100sec 17mm



100% crop



Now this past weekend I shot some while on a hike. I figure since we would be under tree cover that a flash would work good and thought a wee bit open on the apture to let light in would help. To say the least, I'm not impressed. What am I doing wrong? Hopefully it's not the lens and it's just operator malfunction. I was using center weighted average metering and on the 430EX I had the diffuser pulled out and flipped down in front of the flash head (fully auto in program mode)

Resize iso 320 430EX Flash fired, f5.6, 1/250sec 32mm



100% crop



Resize iso 320 430EX Flash fired, f9, 1/250sec 25mm



100% crop



Resize iso 400 430EX Flash fired, f5.6, 1/100sec 17mm



100% crop

[wondershots]

Please explain what you're not impressed with. Look like the flash filled in the shadows nicely IMHO.

[wondershots]

BTW, I'm interested because I'm considering getting this lens myself.

[lextalionis]

Again, the first set of the inside/outside of the coffee shop above are great. It's the hiking and group shots below that I'm not impressed with.

Well, maybe it's my macro bias, but it seems that when there are scenes with bright areas mixed with dark areas that the bright areas are blown and the dark areas are under-exposed. I really feel that I just don't have the experience to shoot wide-angle photography yet. Remember I've only been shooting macro.

For the shots above I feel that they aren not sharp enough and have blown highlights...I also noticed in Bibble that CA was discovered at substantial levels. IDK, I just guess I need to keep playing around with the lens.

Oh and one more thing...when would I ever use 2.8 stop on this lens? For the group shot above, is f9 high enough. Essentially what is considered an average apeture for group shots in ample lighting?

[erisian pope]

I would use the larger aperture in lowerlight (sunrise/set, dusk and twilight, and indoors) and also anytime I want an intentionally shallow DOF.

[TheTuna]

Originally Posted by erisian pope

I would use the larger aperture in lowerlight (sunrise/set, dusk and twilight, and indoors) and also anytime I want an intentionally shallow DOF.

Is DOF in this case Depth of Field or Depth of Focus?

[erisian pope]

Umm - I intended Depth of Field, but wouldn't the two phrases mean the same thing? The larger the aperture (the smaller the number) than the less horizontal space in front of the lens which is in focus.

Without wanting to hijack the thread, here's a picture I took at f/1.8 while experimenting with ultra-shallow DOF:



If I were at F/8 then that picture would have probably had both pieces in focus ... or maybe the back one slightly out of focus as opposed to how it's a total blob now.

[TheTuna]

I agree, I didn't mean to be confusing the point of Roy's thread... I asked because I read somewhere that they are not the same thing, although the author didn't clarify the difference... his comment was that the are not interchangeable terms. If I ever find that again, I'll start a new thread. Thanks!

[erisian pope]

I'd be interested to read it! I'm still pretty new to these terms, and I still use them interchangeably!

[lextalionis]

Well, I think I spoke too soon. After using this lens more and understanding it, I have to say for the money you can't get better than this!

I'm happy now!

[MattMoore]

Originally Posted by lextalionis

Well, I think I spoke too soon. After using this lens more and understanding it, I have to say for the money you can't get better than this!

I'm happy now!

Glad you worked it out.

I can consistently take better shots with this lens than a buddy of mine with a 24-70L f2.8.

I found this lens to be a great lens, once you learn how to use it.