>> |
Anonymous
Nikonfag here, I am also deciding weather or not to buy this or the nikon version which costs around $1,200. The only reason why I am hesitant with the tamron is the build quality and the price. Moreover, I am also looking at the 16-85 f3.5 which costs less and covers more range than the 17-55, however it is not as fast as the 17-55, yet it has VR. Does anyone know how effective the VR is when compared to the 2.8 aperture, in other words, which is better, high apertures or VR ? As for the OP, I think the tamron is a great lens for the price, the only thing I would be worried about is build quality.
|