<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salvomolinaro.com &#187; 17-50</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salvomolinaro.com/tag/17-50/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salvomolinaro.com</link>
	<description>photography and my other passions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:06:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Indeciso tra 16-85 vr nikkor e tamron 17-50 2.8 VC</title>
		<link>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/20/indeciso-tra-16-85-vr-nikkor-e-tamron-17-50-2-8-vc/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/20/indeciso-tra-16-85-vr-nikkor-e-tamron-17-50-2-8-vc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 03:27:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Salvo Molinaro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Salvo risponde]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[16 85 vr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[17-50]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nikkor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nikon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tamron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vr]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salvomolinaro.com/?p=350</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Alessandro scrive: Ciao, mi chiamo Alessandro e sono di Agrigento. Desideravo, cortesemente, un consiglio su un mio acquisto che farò a breve tra l&#8217;af-s 16-85 vr nikon ed il 17-50 vc tamron che andrebbero montati su una D5000. Superando il problema delle diverse focali (16 contro i 17 e 85 contro i 50) e luminosità]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/20/indeciso-tra-16-85-vr-nikkor-e-tamron-17-50-2-8-vc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Consiglio sul passaggio a reflex, conviene?</title>
		<link>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/15/consiglio-sul-passaggio-a-reflex-conviene/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/15/consiglio-sul-passaggio-a-reflex-conviene/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 21:29:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Salvo Molinaro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Salvo risponde]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[17-50]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[18-105 vr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[d5000]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nikon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reflex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tamron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zoom]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salvomolinaro.com/?p=346</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lorenzo Giombini scrive: Ciao Salvo. Volevo sostituire la mia nikon coolpix 7.1 con una reflex Nikon D5000 con obiettivo 18-105 in modo da avere anche un po&#8217; di zoom . Premetto che non sono un esperto di fotografia, ma un amatore, tu me la consiglieresti ?Grazie e ciao Salvo risponde: Ciao Lorenzo e grazie per]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/15/consiglio-sul-passaggio-a-reflex-conviene/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tamron 17-50 vc su nikon d300s</title>
		<link>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/15/tamron-17-50-vc-su-nikon-d300s/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/15/tamron-17-50-vc-su-nikon-d300s/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:45:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Salvo Molinaro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Salvo risponde]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[17-50]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[d300s]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[front focus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nikkor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nikon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polyphoto]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tamron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salvomolinaro.com/?p=344</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ciao Salvo, ho letto la tua recensione sul tamron in oggetto,ho acquistato un Tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC per nikon (ho una d300),sono un fotoamatore e mi piace fare ritratti, spesso la sera, a casa di amici, ed uso di solito un nikon af-s 50 f1.4,ho acquistato il tamron per avere uno zoom più ampio abbastanza]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/15/tamron-17-50-vc-su-nikon-d300s/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Domanda sul tamron 17-50 vc per canon</title>
		<link>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/09/domanda-sul-tamron-17-50-vc-per-canon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/09/domanda-sul-tamron-17-50-vc-per-canon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 14:13:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Salvo Molinaro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Salvo risponde]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[photography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[17-50]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nikon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parigi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tamron]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salvomolinaro.com/?p=341</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ciao, mi sono permesso di scriverti perche ho letto in rete che hai il tamron 17-50 vc. Io sono da poco appassionato di fotografia e la mia attrezzatura comprende: canon 450D canon 70-300 IS USM canon 50mm 1.8 tamron 17-50 2.8 VC Io sinceramente ora non so dirti il numero di serie del mio obiettivo]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2010/01/09/domanda-sul-tamron-17-50-vc-per-canon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tamron 17 50 2.8 VC REVIEW</title>
		<link>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2009/09/30/tamron-17-50-2-8-vc-review/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2009/09/30/tamron-17-50-2-8-vc-review/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:49:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Salvo Molinaro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[photography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[17-50]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2.8]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[salvomolinaro.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tamron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salvomolinaro.com/?p=69</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC REVIEW Today i received my tamron 17-50 2.8 vc. The first thing that i&#8217;ve noticed is that it has some improvement over the non vc version. The most important is that it is now very sturdy and well built.  It feel &#8220;dense&#8221; and &#8220;sturdy&#8221;, is very well built and there is]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2009/09/30/tamron-17-50-2-8-vc-review/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
