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 08 Apr 2013 (Monday) 21:12
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is it worth "upgrading" from Tamron 17-50 to Canon 17-55?

 
Mackeral
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Apr 08, 2013 21:12 |  #1
bannedPermanent ban

So, I think I want to switch up my line-up. If I sell my EOS mount Rokkor 58mm 1.2 and my Tamron 17-50 that gets me close to buying a Canon 17-55. My question is, is the Canon worth the upgrade from the Tamron? How much difference is there? I bought the Tamron as I couldn't afford the Canon option and had heard good things. Just looking for some input.


"Complete quietness surrounded me as the dense fog smothered all sounds. As the sun rose, lifting the fog to reveal this majestic mountain, all my thoughts of the daily hustle and bustle were put away, allowing me to sit in solitude with nature."
-Utter Bull

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
KayakPhotos
Goldmember
Avatar
3,340 posts
Gallery: 158 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2275
Joined May 2008
Location: Bluffton, SC
     
Apr 08, 2013 21:23 |  #2

With good pp the differences are minimal. The canon does have some advantages.

1.) IS- very handy for handheld shots of stationary subjects, especially in low light.

2.) better sharpness and overall iq (based on having owned both)

3.) much better AF in low light. The tamron always struggled with this for me. It was slow and seemed to struggle to acquire focus sometimes.

4.) MUCH quieter AF. Also lightning fast and smooth in ai-servo

Overall I would recommend upgrading at some point. I never regretted it. If budget is a concern, I've heard good things about the sigma OS lens. The tamron VC version seems to have some copy variation but can be good as well.


Just a thought from Daniel
Gear
flickr (external link)

website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Apr 08, 2013 21:27 |  #3
bannedPermanent ban

In short yes it's worth the upgrade.

Buy it once and buy it right...


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Apr 08, 2013 21:27 |  #4

If you need the faster AF , yes . Otherwise no


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,091 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2794
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Apr 08, 2013 22:06 |  #5

The IQ is damn close from mine compared to my friends. However the Canon has a slight, very slight more reach, more weight, phenomenal IS and fast silent AF.

I however sold mine and eventually ended up with the Sigma and wow. Much sharper, super silent AF which is very rapid, a bit over twice the speed as tamron and the OS is amazing much like the Canons. I picked up mine for 500. I had sold the Tamron for 325 so it wasn't but 175 more.

I'm pleased. I got rid of the tamron and got the 24-105, which I loved BUT I just couldn't deal with being stuck at F4 so I went to the Sigma... I couldn't justify the price of a Canon 17-55 (same as the 24-105) yikes.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mackeral
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Apr 08, 2013 22:09 |  #6
bannedPermanent ban

The sigma intrigues me but the price isn't so much an issue. I kind of dont want to play the Sigma lottery honestly


"Complete quietness surrounded me as the dense fog smothered all sounds. As the sun rose, lifting the fog to reveal this majestic mountain, all my thoughts of the daily hustle and bustle were put away, allowing me to sit in solitude with nature."
-Utter Bull

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brules
Senior Member
Avatar
521 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 79
Joined Jun 2010
Location: OKC
     
Apr 08, 2013 22:11 |  #7

IQ may be close, when the Tamron finishes hunting for focus.....I had the Tammy, and their focus system is not near as fast/accurate as Canons. When it hits, its great, I had way too many misses though that I sold it.


S100 | 5D III | 16-35 F4 IS L | 35 F1.4L | 40 2.8 | 85 F1.2 II L | 135 F2 L | 70-200 F2.8 IS II L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrickR
Cream of the Crop
5,935 posts
Likes: 115
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Dallas TX
     
Apr 08, 2013 22:20 |  #8

Its worth upgrading if you need IS and USM which it does better than the Tamron nonVC. But I will not upgrade my Tamron nonVC. It is ridiculously sharp and an excellent studio lens, which is what I use it for, so the AF is a non-issue and over 2x the price for IS isn't worth it for me.


My junk
The grass isn't greener on the other side, it's green where you water it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mackeral
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
524 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Apr 08, 2013 22:25 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

The ability to find focus faster is a huge sell. I'd hate to see my 58mm go, but I really don't use it even though it's a beautiful piece of glass.


"Complete quietness surrounded me as the dense fog smothered all sounds. As the sun rose, lifting the fog to reveal this majestic mountain, all my thoughts of the daily hustle and bustle were put away, allowing me to sit in solitude with nature."
-Utter Bull

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Apr 10, 2013 00:42 |  #10

BrickR wrote in post #15806087 (external link)
Its worth upgrading if you need IS and USM which it does better than the Tamron nonVC. But I will not upgrade my Tamron nonVC. It is ridiculously sharp and an excellent studio lens, which is what I use it for, so the AF is a non-issue and over 2x the price for IS isn't worth it for me.

I agree . I always thought I'd "upgrade" , but never saw the need ...The Tamron's Af has never let me down ..


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dave_bass5
Goldmember
Avatar
4,304 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 204
Joined Apr 2005
Location: London, centre of the universe
     
Apr 10, 2013 04:24 |  #11

The Canon is a better lens, no question. Worth it? Well only the person spending the money can say that.
For me it was definitely worth it, although it wasn't a big jump in IQ and an immediate "wow".
I really liked my Tamron, so at first i was in two minds whether to keep the Canon, it was too close to the Tamron in IQ, bigger and heavier, and of course more money.
After a 2 week trip to Disney i put the Tamron up for sale. The Canon just performed better in all situations, never missed a shot and having IS meant i could go down to about 1/4 in low light (this was back in the 30D/40D days when high ISO was rubbish).
I felt IQ was still better than the Tamron but not by a lot, but the overall package was better and was nicer to use, as I had more trust in the Canon.


Dave.
Gallery@http://www.flickr.com/​photos/davebass5/ (external link)
Canon 5DMKIV | Canon EOS-M50 | Canon 24-70 f/2.8L MKII | 70-300L | 135L f/2.0 | EF-S 10-18 | 40 f/2.8 STM | 35mm f/2 IS | Canon S110 | Fuji F31FD | Canon 580EXII, 270EXII | Yongnuo YN-622C Triggers.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pupu
Senior Member
267 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: India
     
Apr 10, 2013 04:38 |  #12

dave_bass5 wrote in post #15810806 (external link)
The Canon is a better lens, no question. Worth it? Well only the person spending the money can say that.

He said it in this lovely sentence. I use Tamron and I've never missed any shot because of focus speed. I click people. IS does not work for me as SS like 1/50 to 1/4 are anyway useless for portraits. People breath, people move, kids certainly do > and we do not tranquilise them to capture a picture :lol:


550D gripped I Sigma 50mm F1.4 (Non Art) I Canon 100mm F2.0 I Nissin Di622 Mk II I YN 622C triggers I...and few other accessories

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JaapW
Member
107 posts
Joined Dec 2009
     
Apr 10, 2013 05:19 |  #13

For me it was 100% worth it. It's expensive, but simply a perfect walk-around lens for crop cameras. Focus speed, focus accuracy and IS are the features I love.


7D | 17-55mm f/2.8 IS | 70-200mm f/4L IS | 60mm Macro f/2.8 | Canon 85mm f/1.8 | 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kouasupra
Goldmember
2,773 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 652
Joined May 2008
Location: Fresno/Clovis, CA
     
Apr 10, 2013 05:34 |  #14

My old tamron was sharp. I couldn't afford a 17-55 back then so I went the tamron route. The only thing I didn't like about the tamron was the built quality and noise AF motor. Keep in mind that there's a lot of complaint about how dusty the 17-55 gets. Image quality will be really close as stated.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandeepsaman
Member
218 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Feb 2011
     
Apr 10, 2013 08:01 |  #15

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 non vc has never disappointed me . Such a master piece of glass which is able to produce sharpest pics. Luckily my copy is really nice which starts performing at f2.8.
IQ wise you will not find much difference.Bump your camera ISO and increase your shutter speed up to 1/50,why you require then IS in such a short focal length.

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8539/8619033674_1084918fa7_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/sandeepsaman/8​619033674/  (external link)
IMG_8533 (external link) by sandeepsaman (external link), on Flickr

Sandeep singh
Amateurs worry about equipment, Professionals worry about money,Masters worry about light,I just take pictures...
Canon 550d+Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF+Canon 85mm f1.8 +Simpex 886 flash

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

9,401 views & 0 likes for this thread
Is it worth "upgrading" from Tamron 17-50 to 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 BLHdd
601 guests, 247 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.