Will Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC hitting shelfs soon?....

[mypoppy31]

I've already placed my order with Amazon for the new Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC lens...
Does anyone have any info as to when it will be coming out?..

thanks...

[MacHeadCase]

Ooh that's great news!

I was going to pick up next year its predecessor for a general all-around lens for my 50D (I bought the body-only option). I'm going to be watching this and see how much more they'll ask for the IS version and how the lens performs.

Edited to add:

I just did a google for test photos for this lens and came up with this link:

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 VC (http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/date_lens/20090917_315883.html).

[mypoppy31]

I've already placed my order with Amazon. Its selling for $650, but of couse, the price will go lower if your willing to wait for the price to drop. I'm guessing that this lens will be hitting the shelfes sometime in October, Ihope!..

[KayakPhotos]

I've already placed my order with Amazon. Its selling for $650, but of couse, the price will go lower if your willing to wait for the price to drop. I'm guessing that this lens will be hitting the shelfes sometime in October, Ihope!..


That's a good price. Should be a great lens for sure. I have the original and it is very sharp wide open for a zoom lens. The images have a nice "pop" to them straight out of the camera with great colors. I have heard a lot of good things about Tamron's VC system as well. Now, if only Tamron could come up with a USM type focus motor! That is my only beef with the lens, but it only affects low-light shooting which I don't do much of anyway.

[chris21908]

$650? ouch! i bought my 28-75 2.8 for $320 and i love it! awesome walk-around lens!

[Andrushka]

$650? ouch! i bought my 28-75 2.8 for $320 and i love it! awesome walk-around lens!

uh... it has Tamron's version of image stabilization - for a higher price

[livinglight]

But still a lot cheaper than Canon's EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS.

Fortunately I bought mine back in the day with those tradeshow specials for around the $800 mark. Love it, and I know a lot of people rate the Tamron, so it should be interesting to compare the Canon and Tamron.

[10megapixel]

If it's as sharp as the Canon 17-55 IS (Which it looks as if it certainly is, if not sharper by the sample pics) and almost $500 bucks cheaper as well, then it's worth every damn penny. Too bad I just spent $1100 bucks on the 17-55 a few weeks ago :mad: I had the Tammy 17-50 and LOVED it but I needed the IS.

[Andrushka]

If it's as sharp as the Canon 17-55 IS (Which it looks as if it certainly is, if not sharper by the sample pics) and almost $500 bucks cheaper as well, then it's worth every damn penny. Too bad I just spent $1100 bucks on the 17-55 a few weeks ago :mad: I had the Tammy 17-50 and LOVED it but I needed the IS.

BUT - as great as the IQ is coming out of that Tam 17-50, the focusing mechanism still does not compete with the 17-55's USM... (and i actually know this from using both)

Now, whether or not the USM motor is worth the difference in price is for each person to decide. For me the USM is worth it, and if i had skimped on price and went with the tamron 17-50 the first time around, i knew deep inside i would end up selling it and going for the Canon 17-55, probably sooner than later.

But, the IQ on the Tamron 17-50 is awesome, so if your options are limited by budget, its a great lens for the money. Add the IS and its even sweeter.

[10megapixel]

BUT - as great as the IQ is coming out of that Tam 17-50, the focusing mechanism still does not compete with the 17-55's USM... (and i actually know this from using both)

Now, whether or not the USM motor is worth the difference in price is for each person to decide. For me the USM is worth it, and if i had skimped on price and went with the tamron 17-50 the first time around, i knew deep inside i would end up selling it and going for the Canon 17-55, probably sooner than later.

But, the IQ on the Tamron 17-50 is awesome, so if your options are limited by budget, its a great lens for the money. Add the IS and its even sweeter.

Personally, I don't use the 17-55 (nor did I the 17-50) for sports or tracking anything fast, although I know some people do. I see the USM benefiting the longer zooms used for sports and birding, etc... I think for most folks the Tammy's AF motor will not be an issue at all for landscape shots, portraits, and general shooting that lenses in this focal range are usually used for. Like you said Andrushka, it is for the person to decide. I was knocked out by my Tamron 17-50's IQ though, the colors, sharpness, and build was just awesome for the price.

[twalls]

$650? ouch! i bought my 28-75 2.8 for $320 and i love it! awesome walk-around lens!

I'm the same way.. Love mine.. What I use probably 90% of the time before I got into automotive photography, that's why I'm interested in this new focal length.

[Andrushka]

Personally, I don't use the 17-55 (nor did I the 17-50) for sports or tracking anything fast, although I know some people do. I see the USM benefiting the longer zooms used for sports and birding, etc... I think for most folks the Tammy's AF motor will not be an issue at all for landscape shots, portraits, and general shooting that lenses in this focal range are usually used for. Like you said Andrushka, it is for the person to decide. I was knocked out by my Tamron 17-50's IQ though, the colors, sharpness, and build was just awesome for the price.

well for landscapes you don't need USM, ha, for that matter manual focus would probably do! But, even for portraits i would never want to go back to a non-USM lens.

[turbo_911]

Here is the review for Nikon version

"I received this lens a few days ago and immediately started using it. The lens came with a lens hood and caps only, no carrying pouch. The lens is slightly bigger and bulkier than my 18-70 Nikkor that it is replacing. It feels great in the hands and in the camera, I can feel the quality. The lens focused accurately and speedily. I can't comment on its speed versus the non VC version, but its faster than my 18-70 Nikkor (as it should since its $300 more expensive). It locked on in low light pretty good too, something I had trouble with in my 18-70. I tested the VC out and found that the VC has a delay of about a second before taking effect. You will notice the effect because the viewfinder will have a slight jerking motion before taking effect. The VC worked quite well though, taking sharp pics most of the time (if done properly) down to 1/8th second. This lens is TACK SHARP, even at F2.8 it is very sharp.

The zoom ring comes with a zoom creep lock that works at 17mm, but the rings are stiff enough that you won't need to use it.

There are three things that this lens wasn't so great on. The focus is loud, its not an ultrasonic motor. The VC has the 1 second delay which is not so hot. The VC is also loud, you can hear it take effect.

Overall, this is a fine lens for myself. Those who find the VC delay, or noise, might be turned off by it, so take that into consideration. "

Now I don't really want buy it because of lag of VC and again they didn't fix their loud focusing issue.

[carlXSI]

Check out this review: http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2009/09/30/tamron-17-50-2-8-vc-review/

"The first thing that i’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 “dense” and “sturdy”, is very well built and there is no notice of “flimsy”. The second improvement is the focus speed, it’s autofocusing is fast, very fast, more fast than my 18-105 vr which have an HSM motor. Third improvement is the focus “sound”. The old tamron non-vc is very loudy and noisy when focusing. The new is noisy, but the noise is acceptable and is not loudy."

Sounds like a winner to me!

[robojack]

Here is the review for Nikon version

"I received this lens a few days ago and immediately started using it. The lens came with a lens hood and caps only, no carrying pouch. The lens is slightly bigger and bulkier than my 18-70 Nikkor that it is replacing. It feels great in the hands and in the camera, I can feel the quality. The lens focused accurately and speedily. I can't comment on its speed versus the non VC version, but its faster than my 18-70 Nikkor (as it should since its $300 more expensive). It locked on in low light pretty good too, something I had trouble with in my 18-70. I tested the VC out and found that the VC has a delay of about a second before taking effect. You will notice the effect because the viewfinder will have a slight jerking motion before taking effect. The VC worked quite well though, taking sharp pics most of the time (if done properly) down to 1/8th second. This lens is TACK SHARP, even at F2.8 it is very sharp.

The zoom ring comes with a zoom creep lock that works at 17mm, but the rings are stiff enough that you won't need to use it.

There are three things that this lens wasn't so great on. The focus is loud, its not an ultrasonic motor. The VC has the 1 second delay which is not so hot. The VC is also loud, you can hear it take effect.

Overall, this is a fine lens for myself. Those who find the VC delay, or noise, might be turned off by it, so take that into consideration. "

Now I don't really want buy it because of lag of VC and again they didn't fix their loud focusing issue. Wow, a ONE second delay? That's a pretty long delay, considering the Canon 17-55's IS starts up nearly instantly.

[siddr20]

Whats the difference between this and the original tamron 17-50 f2.8?


I currently have this: Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Lens

[quachified]

Whats the difference between this and the original tamron 17-50 f2.8?


I currently have this: Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Lens

The difference is VC, Tamron's equivalent to IS (Image Stabilization). I think VC stands for Vibration Control...

[DStanic]

This is the first I've read of this lens. I'm very excited to say the least!! Saving up for the Canon 17-55 for the IS but really don't want to spend that much on a non-L lens. maybe I'll get the Tamron instead!

If only SIGMA would release a 18-50 OS HSM...

[brownbugger]

wow , I had no idea , i was just thinking about picking up the non-vc one as its priced half the price of 17-55 2.8 canon , but yes i can see the vc handy.

http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm-Vibration-Compensation-Digital/dp/B002LVUIXA

[JayStar86]

so does anyone know the official release date on this lens?

if so, please post up, thanks!

[JayStar86]

So i just checked up on this lens for the Canon and made a few phone calls... according to the retailer this lens shows as first week of November to hit the stores.... so pretty close now... im sold on this piece.... it would perhaps be better if it was priced around the $525-575 mark.... but i guess you always pay for being an early adopter.

hope this helps all you "waiters" on this lens.... i know I am!

[DStanic]

Nice!

If the lens is as good as it looks on paper (I'll have to read a couple reviews before buying it) I'm prepared to spend $650US. Still a better deal to me then spending $850-900 for a used Canon 17-55.
Here in Canada Henry's is taking pre-orders for it at over $900 :rolleyes: while the Canon is $1300 or something. I never understand their high prices especially on 3rd party brands. Might make a trip across the border (or just buy off amazon.com) to get it!

[JayStar86]

Nice!

If the lens is as good as it looks on paper (I'll have to read a couple reviews before buying it) I'm prepared to spend $650US. Still a better deal to me then spending $850-900 for a used Canon 17-55.
Here in Canada Henry's is taking pre-orders for it at over $900 :rolleyes: while the Canon is $1300 or something. I never understand their high prices especially on 3rd party brands. Might make a trip across the border (or just buy off amazon.com) to get it!

that makes you and me both... that is from Canada and going to buy from the States, lol... I think I will just get it from B&H... Although Adorama is the one I called up to find out when it will roughly come out.... so I might just get it from them.... although I do still think the price in this less should be under 600 US.

With the current exchange rate and adding currency conversion charges, shipping and tax the lens still only comes out to be around $750 CAD.... alot less then the $950 CAD locally.

The thing Im waiting for is the availability from a reputable online US vendor for the Canon 7D and the Tamron 17-50 VC so that i can purchase them at the same time.... hopefully early November!

[JayStar86]

If only SIGMA would release a 18-50 OS HSM...

And I AGREE.... only if, right!

[DStanic]

With the current exchange rate and adding currency conversion charges, shipping and tax the lens still only comes out to be around $750 CAD.... alot less then the $950 CAD locally.


I'm hoping our dollar with be on par or higher so I can get it for $650 lol

[JayStar86]

I'm hoping our dollar with be on par or higher so I can get it for $650 lol

LOL.... you still gotta pay shipping and tax though:cry:

[DStanic]

LOL.... you still gotta pay shipping and tax though:cry:

I am not too far from the border. When the time comes I will see if there are any camera shops close to the border in Michigan or something.

[JayStar86]

I am not too far from the border. When the time comes I will see if there are any camera shops close to the border in Michigan or something.

sam here.... 10 minutes from the Border here too.... but you still gotta pay State tax and then tax at the border.... which i always declare now... not worth getting caught IMO.... i used to not declare but then saw what happens first hand and stories what happens when you get caught not declaring items.... just not worth it over a few bucks.

good luck getting your lens when it comes out!!!!

i assume the VC will help in getting clear shots under really low light conditions? what else will it do at this focal range... i mean 17-50 is pretty short range.... im starting to think twice about the VC to be honest.... i was really exited about this lens but starting to question wether another $200 is worth the VC at this focal range....?

[DStanic]

sam here.... 10 minutes from the Border here too.... but you still gotta pay State tax and then tax at the border.... which i always declare now... not worth getting caught IMO.... i used to not declare but then saw what happens first hand and stories what happens when you get caught not declaring items.... just not worth it over a few bucks.

good luck getting your lens when it comes out!!!!

i assume the VC will help in getting clear shots under really low light conditions? what else will it do at this focal range... i mean 17-50 is pretty short range.... im starting to think twice about the VC to be honest.... i was really exited about this lens but starting to question wether another $200 is worth the VC at this focal range....?



If the lens is attached to the camera, box flattened out and tucked away somewhere.. should not be a problem. Hell maybe I'll go to USPS office and ship the box to myself :lol:

I'm (probably) getting this lens because of the VC. Originally I was going to save up for the Canon 17-55 IS, but if this lens is nearly as good I will be happy. IS works amazing for weddings, my Sigma 24-60 f/2.8 is a good lens but that extra couple stops from the IS/VC make a difference to me. Plus I wouldn't mind it being wider then my current lens. So yes, the $200 difference is worth it to me! The original Tamron is a very good lens, if you don't have problems in low light and just want the shallow DOF from f/2.8 then by all means find a nice used copy. :)

[bomboman]

It's very nice lens. Normally I use Canon but the lens is not available in Thailand so I did test with my friend camera, Nikon D300, and it was good.
http://www.photoshopphotography.com/tamron-17-50-vc-review/

[JayStar86]

If the lens is attached to the camera, box flattened out and tucked away somewhere.. should not be a problem. Hell maybe I'll go to USPS office and ship the box to myself :lol:

I'm (probably) getting this lens because of the VC. Originally I was going to save up for the Canon 17-55 IS, but if this lens is nearly as good I will be happy. IS works amazing for weddings, my Sigma 24-60 f/2.8 is a good lens but that extra couple stops from the IS/VC make a difference to me. Plus I wouldn't mind it being wider then my current lens. So yes, the $200 difference is worth it to me! The original Tamron is a very good lens, if you don't have problems in low light and just want the shallow DOF from f/2.8 then by all means find a nice used copy. :)

sounds like a plan dstanic... see i think with this Tamron Lens being my "walk around lens" that goes with me everywhere your bound to end up somewhere in a low light situation without a tripod, right?

so I guess that VC would come in handy.... but im just questioning at this focal range 17-50 will that VC really make "that big" a difference in shots from the card that turn out "usable".

its a tough call IMO... seems like there is debate both ways.... but I mean for simplicity sake .... if it didn't do anything then Canon probably wouldn't have it on there lens, right?


It's very nice lens. Normally I use Canon but the lens is not available in Thailand so I did test with my friend camera, Nikon D300, and it was good.
http://www.photoshopphotography.com/tamron-17-50-vc-review/


Thanks for that review.... the fact that your saying the AF performs better and is less noisy added with the VC.... seems like this lens might be worth it after all... your the second person on the web to say that the VC version has a better AF and less noise... I might just stick to my original instincts and get the VC after all.

and you have definitely had the non-VC version of this lens and used it and made your conclusions about the new VC version?

[DStanic]

@bomboman

Did you notice any kind of delay with the VC? I read somewhere someone saying it took one second to kick in (whereas the Canon 17-55 is pretty much instant) did you notice this and was it an issue?

@JayStar86 Shooting wedding in churches with no flash pushes f/2.8 zoom lenses to their limits at ISO1600. The Canon 17-55 works really awsome, the IS makes for WAY more keepers! Also if you shoot bands in dimly lit venues it can work as good as my 85mm did at f/2.

I don't use tripods much.

[bomboman]

@bomboman

Did you notice any kind of delay with the VC? I read somewhere someone saying it took one second to kick in (whereas the Canon 17-55 is pretty much instant) did you notice this and was it an issue?

@JayStar86 Shooting wedding in churches with no flash pushes f/2.8 zoom lenses to their limits at ISO1600. The Canon 17-55 works really awsome, the IS makes for WAY more keepers! Also if you shoot bands in dimly lit venues it can work as good as my 85mm did at f/2.

I don't use tripods much.

I current use Non VC version and I am so impressed with it. When I did test the VC version, the VC is not delay. I feel as IS.

[bomboman]

sounds like a plan dstanic... see i think with this Tamron Lens being my "walk around lens" that goes with me everywhere your bound to end up somewhere in a low light situation without a tripod, right?

so I guess that VC would come in handy.... but im just questioning at this focal range 17-50 will that VC really make "that big" a difference in shots from the card that turn out "usable".

its a tough call IMO... seems like there is debate both ways.... but I mean for simplicity sake .... if it didn't do anything then Canon probably wouldn't have it on there lens, right?





Thanks for that review.... the fact that your saying the AF performs better and is less noisy added with the VC.... seems like this lens might be worth it after all... your the second person on the web to say that the VC version has a better AF and less noise... I might just stick to my original instincts and get the VC after all.

and you have definitely had the non-VC version of this lens and used it and made your conclusions about the new VC version?

Yes, I still currently use Non VC version. This is my sample photo (Canon EOS 400D, TV=1/500, f 4.0, ISO 400, at 17 mm).
Non VC version is very nice as well but for low shutter speed VC helps you a lot.
http://www.photoshopphotography.com/tamron-no-vc.jpg

[cory1848]

I am wondering what this will do to the market price of the non VC version. I will be selling mine to fund the new one and hoping I can at least cover half the cost of the new one...

[DStanic]

Well I just pre-ordered it from Henry's for a cool $659 Canadian! :)

thanks JayStar for the heads up on the lower price!!!

Can't wait to get it! I will test it extensively and expect it to perform at least 80% as good as the Canon 17-55 IS, otherwise I will be returning it.

Expect to see a few of my lenses in the for sale section in the coming weeks. :lol:

[DBJ]

Announced, the 17-50 VC will be released starting 10/29.

http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/news/release_2009/1023.html

[JayStar86]

Well I just pre-ordered it from Henry's for a cool $659 Canadian! :)

thanks JayStar for the heads up on the lower price!!!


no problem bud!!!! anytime i can help a fellow canadian from getting ripped off by the ridiculous price differences we face from manufactures and vendors.... but it looks like Tamron did us right with price on this one for Canadians..... lets just hope the price doesn't jump up later on.... which i suspect it will.... but you never know.

make sure you post some reviews of the lens once you get it.... im a little delayed on my purchase on this lens as im totally confused with buying a new body right now, lol.... I dont want to get the lens if i end up getting a full frame camera! so i need to decide my camera first that im going to upgrade to!

[dogwalker]

I'm very interested in this lens, too, to replace the 18-55 IS kit lens which came with my 450D, but I'm confused about the "one second delay." I've read that a few places, but surely that doesn't mean that having VC on causes a one second delay on every shot?

bomboman, that's a great shot! Very nice, sharp, and great color.

[DStanic]

Sample photos (Nikon) and review from Chinese website (http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://review.fengniao.com/151/1519350.html&prev=hp&rurl=translate.google.com&usg=ALkJrhgqVfBfbJ3O7-3T1P2f9QtEwJpKDw)

[borism]

A little flickr search gave me this
http://www.flickr.com/groups/tamron_17-50mm_vc/

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=%22TAMRON%2017-50%20VC%22&w=all

it looks very promising in my book

I am waiting for more formal reviews to show up, I am looking in between the Tamron 17-50 vc and the new Canon EFS 15-85IS