Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 04 Oct 2010 (Monday) 15:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tamron 17-50 2.8 Non IS

 
mrbez
Senior Member
279 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
     
Oct 04, 2010 15:57 |  #1

Hi Guys,

Would you recommend this lens as a replacement over the 18-55?

I have just borrowed a 17-55 2.8 and absolutely loved it, but I can not afford the £750 price tag. However, the Tamron is coming in at £250 and people have advised me to get the non IS version?

If you wouldn't recommend this lens, what else would you suggest for around £350 max.

Regards.


Canon 40D | 17-55 F2.8 | 50 F1.8 | 10-20 F4-5.6 | 430EXii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Rivest
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,678 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Canada.
     
Oct 04, 2010 17:45 |  #2

I bought it to replace the kit lens, can't be happier. I also bought a 17-40 L before and sold it to get the 17-50. Buy it, you won't regret it!


Hi, I'm David.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wombatHorror
Goldmember
1,937 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: NJ
     
Oct 04, 2010 18:07 |  #3

Rivest wrote in post #11033774 (external link)
I bought it to replace the kit lens, can't be happier. I also bought a 17-40 L before and sold it to get the 17-50. Buy it, you won't regret it!

Exact same scenario here. Had 18-55 (non-IS, the IS is a lot better), got the 17-40L and then sold the L after getting the tamron 17-50.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,533 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Aug 2008
     
Oct 04, 2010 18:32 |  #4

the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 non IS or the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HmrMike
Junior Member
21 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Oct 04, 2010 20:10 |  #5

Went from 18-55IS to the Tammy. Honestly, not too much difference in sharpness (But the tamron is already as sharp at f/2.8 :)).
But the kit lens had way more CA (so I was forced to PP more) and the aperture was annoying and limiting, the IS was useless for me.
After reading MANY reviews, the 17-50 turned out to be the best choice for the price.
I love this lens, even wide open. The motor is definitely slower than the 17-55, but quick enough generally. It's also loud- complements the whine of my XSI's mirror/shutter :D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rivest
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,678 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Canada.
     
Oct 04, 2010 20:14 |  #6

My tamron is as sharp as my 70-200. It is really sharp. It might be my sharpest lens. Go for it.


Hi, I'm David.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yogestee
"my posts can be a little colourful"
Avatar
13,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 37
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Australia
     
Oct 04, 2010 20:39 as a reply to  @ Rivest's post |  #7

The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 is a great lens..I really like mine..


Jurgen
50D~700D~EOS M~G11~S95~GoPro Hero4 Silver
http://www.pbase.com/j​urgentreue (external link)
The Title Fairy,, off with her head!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan ­ Idler
Goldmember
Avatar
1,600 posts
Likes: 4
Joined May 2005
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
     
Oct 04, 2010 20:42 |  #8

I will chime in. I love my Tamraon 17-50 F/2.8 as well. I tried the 17-40 F/4L before trying the Tamron, and found the tamron Sharper than the Canon as well. I thought it might have been the display 17-40 so I got them to take another one out of the box and found it the same as the first one. So I saved some money and went with the Tamron :-)

--Evan


Canon5DIII + Some L + Some non L + Some Sigma + Some Tamron + other stuff....
Patiently awaiting a winning Lottery Ticket to afford all the toys I would really like :-P

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rivest
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,678 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Canada.
     
Oct 04, 2010 20:51 |  #9

As for IS, people on here are saying the Non-Vc should be sharper. But I guess If you need/want IS than go for it ;)


Hi, I'm David.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HmrMike
Junior Member
21 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Oct 04, 2010 21:10 |  #10

The non-VC is sharper according to reviews. But the center sharpness is about the same.
So, both models are sharp, but one is sharper over the whole frame :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mrbez
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
279 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
     
Oct 04, 2010 22:26 |  #11

Would I notice the lack of IS?


Canon 40D | 17-55 F2.8 | 50 F1.8 | 10-20 F4-5.6 | 430EXii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan ­ Idler
Goldmember
Avatar
1,600 posts
Likes: 4
Joined May 2005
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
     
Oct 04, 2010 22:42 |  #12

The Canon 17-55 F/2.8 IS is a very nice lens, if you can afford it, I do suggest it. But at twice the price of the Tamron here, I couldn't afford it at the time, and can't justify buying one now, even if I can afford it.

But it depends upon how often you take photo's in low light. The IS will definately help compensate for your movements, but it will do nothing for the movement of the subject of your photo. I just got back from a month in Paris, and definately would have appreciated the IS in the dimly lit Museum's that your not allowed to use a flash in. But I was taking pictures of stationary objects. If they were moving, it wouldn't have helped because of motion blur. So it just depends upon what your taking pictures of, and where.

--Evan


Canon5DIII + Some L + Some non L + Some Sigma + Some Tamron + other stuff....
Patiently awaiting a winning Lottery Ticket to afford all the toys I would really like :-P

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
19,118 posts
Gallery: 58 photos
Likes: 3664
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Oct 04, 2010 22:58 as a reply to  @ Evan Idler's post |  #13

I think you'd enjoy the Tamron, it's a good lens at a good price point. The difference in sharpness between the non-IS and the IS is likely to be negligible if you you need/want IS, I'd get that one; mine was plenty sharp (til I dropped it) :p

I still think that some other features of the Canon make it more attractive; but if you're on a budget that excludes that, I wouldn't hesitate in recommending the Tamron.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elogical
Goldmember
Avatar
1,217 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: St Paul, Minnesota
     
Oct 04, 2010 22:59 |  #14

MrCraigBerry wrote in post #11035392 (external link)
Would I notice the lack of IS?

I didn't. It's really not terribly necessary at these lower focal lengths. Going by the generally used rule, you just need to maintain better than 1/50th s handheld which shouldn't be too tough.
If you want to test it out though, the easiest thing to try is going shooting for a day with the kit lens and turn IS off.

The sharpness on this lens is very noticeably better than the kit lens but the more important thing to me was the constant aperture and the 2.8 for nice fast shots and DOF effects. (M mode with the kit lens is such a pain).

I spent so much time looking at lens and came to this one as well. Unfortunately mine is in for repair right now, but this doesn't seem to be a huge issue for most people so I'm hoping it's just a fluke thing.


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HmrMike
Junior Member
21 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Oct 04, 2010 23:01 |  #15

Sure IS helps.
But I think that it's advantage starts under 1/15 for me (lowest speed that was not blurry handheld). Never had anything lit so dimly to use such shutter speed (after maxing ISO at 1600). I've just tried shooting under a single 60W bulb- at f/2.8 and ISO 200, that needed a 1/20 second exposure. So no problem at 17mm. At 50mm just bump the ISO to 800 for at least 1/40.
If you don't want or can't hold the camera steady enough (I admit it requires some concentration, shooting some guns seems like a good way to train :D) - an IS could be great help in very low light situations.

But comparing a stabilized f/3.5-5.6 lens with a simple f/2.8 lens- I'd rather use the f/2.8- even in low light (the shutter speed will always be higher anyway).
I never really liked the IS on the 18-55 anyway.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,385 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tamron 17-50 2.8 Non IS
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is mstaves
686 guests, 231 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.