Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

Started Sep 16, 2013 | Questions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Pikka New Member • Posts: 3
Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

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 Member • Posts: 663
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

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

Chris R-UK Forum Pro • Posts: 15,745
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

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
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +4 more
beagle1 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,664
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

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

mgd43 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,314
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

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
Nikon Coolpix P7800 Nikon D5500 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR +3 more
Pikka OP New Member • Posts: 3
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

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!

Pikka OP New Member • Posts: 3
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

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.

mgd43 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,314
Re: Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC or non-VC

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
Nikon Coolpix P7800 Nikon D5500 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR +3 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads