Question about Tamron Lenses

[pittsburghmom]

Yes, I am still agonizing about lens choice to go along with my (soon to be Canon 60D) camera. I am torn between several options: Canon f1.8 50mm, Canon EF-S 17-55 f.2.8 IS USM or the Tamron 17-50 f2.8....

I am seeing 2 versions of the Tamron lens on Amazon....one with VC (vibration control) and the one without. I understand the VC is the equivalent of IS, but the one without is currently much less expensive. Does anyone have either one of the mentioned Tamron lenses? How do you like them? Do you have the VC or non-VC version? do you wish you would have sprung for the pricier Canon lens? Thanks!!

 

[SkaGoat]

I have the non-vc version on my Canon 7D. It's great, if I had the cash I'd probably get the Canon (it's focusing motor is sooo much better than the Tamron's), but the Tamron is worth a lot more than they charge for it.

I don't shoot in situations where the IS would benefit me a whole lot.

 

[photo_chick]

The consensus in reviews I've read is that the non-VC version of the Tamron is a little bit sharper. That's the only version I've used of this lens so I can't back that up with personal experience. The non-VC version is a solid lens. Although if I had the budget I'd go for the Canon 17-55 f/2.8. It may not have the L series branding but it's L series quality glass and worth the money for crop shooters if you can afford it. It's one of those lenses that you'll get and never be longing for more as far as a standard zoom on a crop camera goes. One more consideration, and I've not had my hands on this one, is the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. It's got a more limited focal range but f/1.8 in a zoom is very tempting and I've heard really great things about it.

 

[pittsburghmom]

Thank you for the input. Here is what I am seeing on Amazon. All the abbreviations are intimidating. The one that is 41% off right now is very attractive, but I'm unsure, besides the non-VC, what the differences are

Choice #1 : http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm-Aspherical-Canon-Cameras/dp/B000FZ3FY8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1403373343&sr=8-1&keywords=tamron+17-50+canon

Choice #2: http://www.amazon.com/AF-17-50mm-2-8-Aspherical-Lens/dp/B000EXR0SI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1403373343&sr=8-3&keywords=tamron+17-50+canon

Choice #3: http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm-Vibration-Compensation-Digital/dp/B002LVUIXA/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1403373343&sr=8-2&keywords=tamron+17-50+canon

 

[mom2rtk]

The consensus in reviews I've read is that the non-VC version of the Tamron is a little bit sharper. That's the only version I've used of this lens so I can't back that up with personal experience. The non-VC version is a solid lens. Although if I had the budget I'd go for the Canon 17-55 f/2.8. It may not have the L series branding but it's L series quality glass and worth the money for crop shooters if you can afford it. It's one of those lenses that you'll get and never be longing for more as far as a standard zoom on a crop camera goes. One more consideration, and I've not had my hands on this one, is the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. It's got a more limited focal range but f/1.8 in a zoom is very tempting and I've heard really great things about it.

I absolutely concur with all of this.

I toiled over which of these 3 lenses to get. I too heard that the Tamron non-VC version was sharper. Which was a problem since I have unsteady hands and really wanted stabilization.

One other thing I heard was that the AF on the Tamron lens was very loud. Once I listened to it on youtube, I knew it wasn't for me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHxhJCY31FY

Ultimately I decided that I was tired of buying lenses only to decide months later that I wished I had waited and gotten what I really wanted. I got the Canon version 4 years ago and haven't looked back. I have never regretted the extra cost. It's on my camera 95% of the time, so definitely worth the investment. If you look trough any of the trip reports linked in my signature, the vast majority of those photos were taken with that Canon lens.

 

[firemanchip]

I`ve been using the Tamron 17-50, 2.8( non VC ) for about a year now and I really like the results I get. I just upgraded to A 70D and also ordered the Sigma 18-35, 1.8. I got the camera already but the lens is on back-order. The plan is to replace the Tamron lens with the Sigma. I`m going to hold on to the Tamron just in case though.

 

[bob100]

Thank you for the input. Here is what I am seeing on Amazon. All the abbreviations are intimidating. The one that is 41% off right now is very attractive, but I'm unsure, besides the non-VC, what the differences are

Choice #1 : http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm-Aspherical-Canon-Cameras/dp/B000FZ3FY8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1403373343&sr=8-1&keywords=tamron+17-50+canon

Choice #2: http://www.amazon.com/AF-17-50mm-2-8-Aspherical-Lens/dp/B000EXR0SI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1403373343&sr=8-3&keywords=tamron+17-50+canon

Choice #3: http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm-Vibration-Compensation-Digital/dp/B002LVUIXA/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1403373343&sr=8-2&keywords=tamron+17-50+canon

the first two are the non-vc version of the Tamron 17-50 which is good but if you need image stabilization look at the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS HSM - cost a little more but it gets great reviews. Or hold off until you learn more, the Tamron 17-50 used frequently sells for $200 - $250 on POTN.

Canon 60D
Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-vc
f2.8
ISO 2500

 

[Luvscrappin]

I agree...if you can swing it then go for the canon. I purchased this last year and I love it! It takes pictures that are as good as any glass lens I have rented. It's also on my camera 95% of the time.. You won't regret it!

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I bought the Tamron non-IS version for the DW to replace her kit lens. We shoot Pentax and therefore didn't need the IS. As far as I'm concerned its a winner. Here is a photo taken by my DGD using the lens on her Pentax K30 shooting through glass of an Ariel statuette.

Ariel G 0803 by Terry McGraw Photography, on Flickr

This lens is on her camera 90% of the time and is used for everything from shooting portraits to racecars. I have never heard any excessive focusing motor noise. Just my experience.

 

[SkaGoat]

I have never heard any excessive focusing motor noise. Just may experience.

I'm pretty sure the Pentax version of this lens uses the motor built into the Pentax's body, Canon cameras don't have motors in the bodies, they rely on motors in the lens (it's generally faster), this lens is loud, but that really only matters if you plan on doing video.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I'm pretty sure the Pentax version of this lens uses the motor built into the Pentax's body, Canon cameras don't have motors in the bodies, they rely on motors in the lens (it's generally faster), this lens is loud, but that really only matters if you plan on doing video.

More than likely.

 

[mom2rtk]

I'm pretty sure the Pentax version of this lens uses the motor built into the Pentax's body, Canon cameras don't have motors in the bodies, they rely on motors in the lens (it's generally faster), this lens is loud, but that really only matters if you plan on doing video.

.......or have kids who scatter to the wind at the first sound coming from a camera.