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 27 Dec 2010 (Monday) 12:02
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

From Photo Archives Tamron 17-50 Non-VC looks just as good as Canon 17-55 !?!?!

 
dmo580
Senior Member
760 posts
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jan 03, 2011 08:03 |  #31

AlanU wrote in post #11522337 (external link)
Websize photos will hide things. Canons USM AF motors will certainly be a lot more faster and quieter than a Tamron. The Canon will not sound like you have a captured bumble bee in the lens.

If Weddings were my bread and butter I would use the Canon for speed and accuracy. The Tammy is no doubt an incredible bang for the buck but I would have more confidence in the Canon lens for crucial photos.

I chose a Sigma 18-50 many years ago because I liked the build more than the Tammy (this current setup is my wifes XTI/lens combo). If I decided to go for a 1.6 crop again I would no doubt purchase a Canon 17-55IS. MY motto is cry once $$$ so theres no buyers remorse later.

Very true. My friend followed me and got himself a f/2.8 lens. He got the Tammy and I got the Canon instead. Both look remarkeable in terms of IQ. I say the IS helps me a little more in low light indoor shots.

It is true the 17-50 is loud as hell in AF. When we were shooting in more quiet areas, it was so freaking loud while my 17-55 IS was dead silent :D

The 17-50 sounds kinda like the Tokina 11-16 in terms of AF noise, except it's about 10x louder. It's also louder than the 18-55mm kit lens. And yes, it does sound like a high pitched buzzing bee.


Canon 7D & Rebel T1i: Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, Canon 55-250mm IS, Canon 28 f/1.8, Speedlite 580EX II, Speedlite 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jan 03, 2011 12:03 |  #32

dmo580 wrote in post #11563287 (external link)
It is true the 17-50 is loud as hell in AF. .

"sounds" like an exaggeration !




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
andydufresne
Junior Member
25 posts
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 03, 2011 17:16 |  #33

watt100 wrote in post #11562817 (external link)
Banbury Cross in Faux England !
(Busch Gardens is open during the Christmas season)


The "Old Country" -

XSi (450D) - Tamron 17-50 2.8 - at f2.8

QUOTED IMAGE

lol awesome, i was going to go with epcot. never been to either but just it looked very euro yet had a total american feel to it so i was confused. :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
twoshadows
Liquid Nitrogen
Avatar
7,037 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 3215
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Between the palms and the pines.
     
Jan 03, 2011 17:32 |  #34

dmo580 wrote in post #11563287 (external link)
It is true the 17-50 is loud as hell in AF.

watt100 wrote in post #11564540 (external link)
"sounds" like an exaggeration !

http://www.youtube.com …_detailpage&v=l​IkaO4RQ4zo (external link)


xgender.net (external link) Miss Julia Grey (she/her/Miss)
OST, API, PPP & MLI explained (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jj_glos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,938 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 163
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Gloucester UK
     
Jan 03, 2011 17:50 |  #35

The two I have had are nowhere near that loud at all. They're not silent by any stretch of the imagination but neither were like angry bees! :D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,271 posts
Likes: 2110
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Jan 03, 2011 18:29 as a reply to  @ post 11526048 |  #36

This is a never ending argument. Devotees of the Tammy want you to think that you have wasted your money on the Canon and devotees of the Canon want you to think that this is the only lens that captures good images.

Actually, probably the true answer is midway between the two opinions. However, I have and use the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Since I can afford it, I decided to get it! I keep my equipment for a long time and when amortized over five or ten years or amortized over multi thousands of shots, the price difference isn't really mind blowing...


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jj_glos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,938 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 163
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Gloucester UK
     
Jan 03, 2011 18:36 |  #37

Ah but I got the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 non VC, Sigma 30mm f1.4 and Sigma 50mm f1.4 all for the price of the Canon... If money wasn't an issue though, I'd have the Canon.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elogical
Goldmember
Avatar
1,217 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: St Paul, Minnesota
     
Jan 03, 2011 18:59 |  #38

I'm very happy with the tamron overall, but I'm not as sure as I was back when I bought it. I'd kinda like to have IS and faster focusing wouldn't hurt. Sure the noise is kinda loud, but it's not breathtakingly different than the kit lens. From some of the comments you'd think that's a deal breaker but it's not as bad as you'd think unless you're shooting a wedding or something... and if you're shooting professionally, I assume most would go straight for the canon anyway.
Now that I've tried lenses with USM and HSM though and felt the build quality on a couple higher grade lenses, I do have a slight urge to upgrade which I'll resist for the time being


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mazdaspeed
Senior Member
310 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jan 03, 2011 19:11 |  #39

The only thing holding me back from pulling the trigger on a tamron 17-50 is the focusing motor. How bad is it REALLY in dim light? How often does it REALLY misfocus? I know a lot of people like to show the good pics they can take, but I wonder how many are honest about the AF, especially if they've used a canon with USM. Thoughts?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mpclimber
Member
55 posts
Joined Oct 2010
     
Jan 03, 2011 19:17 |  #40

Here's a question: is the Tamron big enough to cast a shadow when the pop up flash is used? The Canon does.


Body: Canon T2i
Glass: 17-55; Sigma 30; 55-250
Light: 420ex

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HmrMike
Junior Member
21 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jan 03, 2011 19:23 as a reply to  @ mazdaspeed's post |  #41

Well, My tammy didn't let me down in a place lit by only three street lights some 30 feet away.
At ISO 1600, f/2.8 I had to use a shutter speed of about 1/20 (fastest that I could allow-still tons of motion blur on people), only to push one stop later on. The lens, or my XSI, did miss once every ten shots or so, but not by much. A stabilizer would have helped, but I rarely shoot in low light anyway.
The motor's loud though. "Why's your lens so loud?" That's how awesome sounds like.

mpclimber wrote in post #11567264 (external link)
Here's a question: is the Tamron big enough to cast a shadow when the pop up flash is used? The Canon does.

The lens itself, at about 17mm does cast a shadow that covers about 1/5th of the frame. That's at close focusing distances (under three feet).
With the hood there's obviously a larger shadow,taking up almost half the frame at the same distances.
At longer focal lengths I don't see this shadow unless the camera's really close to the ground.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Jan 03, 2011 19:23 |  #42

mazdaspeed wrote in post #11567226 (external link)
The only thing holding me back from pulling the trigger on a tamron 17-50 is the focusing motor. How bad is it REALLY in dim light? How often does it REALLY misfocus? I know a lot of people like to show the good pics they can take, but I wonder how many are honest about the AF, especially if they've used a canon with USM. Thoughts?

You have to remember it doesn't have USM/HSM and give it time to focus . If you expect it to snap on the subject like the 85mm 1.8 does , you're out of luck . Really, it does a good job and my keeper rate is high.


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elogical
Goldmember
Avatar
1,217 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: St Paul, Minnesota
     
Jan 03, 2011 19:57 |  #43

mazdaspeed wrote in post #11567226 (external link)
The only thing holding me back from pulling the trigger on a tamron 17-50 is the focusing motor. How bad is it REALLY in dim light? How often does it REALLY misfocus? I know a lot of people like to show the good pics they can take, but I wonder how many are honest about the AF, especially if they've used a canon with USM. Thoughts?

What other lenses do you have or have tried that I can compare to?
I find the Tamron to focus significantly faster than the kit lens or other non-USM canon lenses, but slower than HSM/ USM lenses like the L's and the nicer Sigma. I'm not gonna lie, the USM on my 70-200mm (sorry, don't have the 17-55mm canon to compare directly) is a lot better overall, but it's really not gonna be a deal breaker unless you're shooting sports or are really demanding of your lenses.

I don't have any problems at all with it mis-focusing. Not that it never misfocuses, just that the situations it does this in are the same situations that my other lenses would do the same thing.

What countryboy says is right on. You just have to give it time to focus and your keeper rate will be just fine. You're only gonna have a problem shooting real fast action or if you get snap-happy and pull the trigger before the lens locks on.

It's also very quick going to objects at similar distances, it's only when you go from infinity in to close-up that you even really notice the lack of speed.


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pxchoi
Goldmember
1,146 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jan 03, 2011 20:09 |  #44

I was very happy with the Tamron 17-50 non VC.

I now own the Canon 17-55 IS, and I'm extremely happy.


Patrick Choi
Portfolio (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Facebook (external link)
EOS 7D | 580EX II | 10-22mm f3.5-f4.5 | 17-55mm f/2.8 IS |70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
For Sale: 17-55mm f/2.8 IS | 10-22mm f3.5-f4.5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mazdaspeed
Senior Member
310 posts
Joined Oct 2008
     
Jan 03, 2011 21:04 |  #45

Thanks for the input. I guess I'm just traumatized by the nifty fifty and am afraid to get a shady focusing lens. Maybe the tamron isn't as bad as some make it sound.




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

7,597 views & 0 likes for this thread
From Photo Archives Tamron 17-50 Non-VC looks just as good as Canon 17-55 !?!?!
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 RRRAlaskan
633 guests, 222 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.