Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

Started Sep 16, 2013 | Questions
Pikka
New MemberPosts: 3
Like?
Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC
Sep 16, 2013

Hello everyone,

I have a Canon 450D with a kit lens and a 50mm 1.8 lens. I recently tried a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens and I found it much better than the kit one, thinking of buying it for myself.

The question: I can choose between Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 with or without the the VC (vibration compensation, stabilization). I take a lot of family pictures (2 y/o kid) inside the house so pictures tend to be blurry now and then, am I right to think the VC would help a bit in those low-light situations, or am I better off buying a non-VC Tamron and a better flash? Also I read somewhere that the non-VC lens has better optics, anyone have and additional information about this?

Thanks in advance,

Pikka

ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Anderton
Contributing MemberPosts: 663
Like?
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC
In reply to Pikka, Sep 16, 2013

Pikka wrote:

Hello everyone,

I have a Canon 450D with a kit lens and a 50mm 1.8 lens. I recently tried a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens and I found it much better than the kit one, thinking of buying it for myself.

The question: I can choose between Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 with or without the the VC (vibration compensation, stabilization). I take a lot of family pictures (2 y/o kid) inside the house so pictures tend to be blurry now and then, am I right to think the VC would help a bit in those low-light situations, or am I better off buying a non-VC Tamron and a better flash? Also I read somewhere that the non-VC lens has better optics, anyone have and additional information about this?

Thanks in advance,

Pikka

Both image stabiliser where available as well as flash, however you probably need to check:

* shutter speed vs subject movement

* your hand control of the camera

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chris R-UK
Forum ProPosts: 12,655Gear list
Like?
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC
In reply to Pikka, Sep 16, 2013

Pikka wrote:

Hello everyone,

I have a Canon 450D with a kit lens and a 50mm 1.8 lens. I recently tried a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens and I found it much better than the kit one, thinking of buying it for myself.

The question: I can choose between Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 with or without the the VC (vibration compensation, stabilization). I take a lot of family pictures (2 y/o kid) inside the house so pictures tend to be blurry now and then, am I right to think the VC would help a bit in those low-light situations, or am I better off buying a non-VC Tamron and a better flash? Also I read somewhere that the non-VC lens has better optics, anyone have and additional information about this?

Thanks in advance,

Pikka

You are correct that the non-VC version appears to have better performance then the VC version.  You might want to read this review from Photozone

The Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS gets better reviews than the Tamron VC version but not quite as good Tamron non-VC.  If you want an image stabilized version of the lens you might want to go with the Sigma instead of the Tamron.

I have the Tamron non-VC but I bought it before the Tamron VC version or the Sigma were available.  I do occasionally miss having image stabilization so if I were buying today I would probably go for the Sigma.

-- hide signature --

Chris R

 Chris R-UK's gear list:Chris R-UK's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
beagle1
Senior MemberPosts: 2,883
Like?
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC
In reply to Pikka, Sep 16, 2013

Pikka wrote:

Hello everyone,

I have a Canon 450D with a kit lens and a 50mm 1.8 lens. I recently tried a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens and I found it much better than the kit one, thinking of buying it for myself.

The question: I can choose between Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 with or without the the VC (vibration compensation, stabilization). I take a lot of family pictures (2 y/o kid) inside the house so pictures tend to be blurry now and then, am I right to think the VC would help a bit in those low-light situations, or am I better off buying a non-VC Tamron and a better flash? Also I read somewhere that the non-VC lens has better optics, anyone have and additional information about this?

Thanks in advance,

Pikka

The Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-vc has an excellent reputation but if the budget is more consider the newer Sigma 17-50 2.8 EX DC HSM OS

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mgd43
Senior MemberPosts: 3,386Gear list
Like?
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC
In reply to beagle1, Sep 17, 2013

I had the non-VC Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Image quality was not the problem, focus was. It often focused slowly and hunted in low light. I replaced it with the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS HSM. It focuses quickly and quietly. I don't see a difference in image quality.

Stabilization is more important in longer lenses than a 17-50, but it does come in handy at times. However, it doesn't help much with moving subjects. It helps with blur caused by camera shake at low shutter speeds, but preventing motion blur is a matter of having a high enough shutter speed with or without stabilization.

 mgd43's gear list:mgd43's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Nikon Coolpix P7800 Nikon D5200 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pikka
New MemberPosts: 3
Like?
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC
In reply to mgd43, Sep 17, 2013

Thank you all for the answers! I'll look into Sigma 17-50, the reviews I saw by now are really good. And it seems stabilization won't bring me a lot, I have to play with the faster shutter speed. Cheers again!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pikka
New MemberPosts: 3
Like?
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC
In reply to Pikka, Sep 17, 2013

Hmm, the more I research about the Sigma 17-50 the more I think there could be a problem with it.

There's quite a few posts about Sigma (and other non-Canon lenses) having trouble with the focus, especially if you're not using a single AF point. Apparently Canon doesn't support other lenses (hey, it's their decision, have to respect it I suppose). First I read about it was in a user review of the Sigma 17-50 lens on DPR (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3404120), and after a few searches other posts just popped up.

I usually use a single AF point so I reckon I won't have any issues (had the Tamron 17-50 in single AF over the weekend and the pictures turned ok), but I wouldn't be comfortable buying a lens that I know is not supported by the body manufacturer and has proven to have a few focus issues.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mgd43
Senior MemberPosts: 3,386Gear list
Like?
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC
In reply to Pikka, Sep 17, 2013

Check the reviews in reliable magazines and on reliable websites. User reviews are very unreliable. The NY Times had an article a while back that said that 1/3 of all user reviews are phoney. My experience is that in addition to that many users don't know what they are talking about. They lack the experience and the knowledge to accurately evaluate a camera or lens. I've even seen reviews that were reviewing the wrong lens. Often it was on older version of the lens. The web is full of both good and bad information. To avoid the bad information pay attention only to sources that you know to be reliable.

 mgd43's gear list:mgd43's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Nikon Coolpix P7800 Nikon D5200 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads