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 28 Dec 2013 (Saturday) 17:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Justification in replacing canon 18-55 IS

 
Frodge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,075 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 28, 2013 17:20 |  #1

Hi folks. I want to know if it can seriously be justified replacing the 18-55 IS with the Tamron 17-50? I also own a 40mm 2.8 which I like as well as a 50mm 1.8 that I also like. I know the Tamron is a good lens, but is it worth it considering the lenses that I already have. I had a similar post about the sigma vs tamron, now I would like to know if it is actually worth dropping $500 considering what I already own.


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,491 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 578
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Dec 28, 2013 17:26 |  #2

Justification:

1) Do you have the money, and how much of a negative effect on your regular budget is this expenditure? vs.

2) How often would you find the faster maximum aperture of the 17-50 to be useful / required for the shot you have in mind?

None of us can really answer either question for you. If your personal finances are relatively good and you know the faster lens would be well used, then you get it. If your finances are a mess then maybe not a good idea.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,075 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 28, 2013 17:29 |  #3

Money is technically not an issue. I basically don't want to waste money on something that is really not necessary. (Iq etc)


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,405 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 846
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Dec 28, 2013 17:32 |  #4

Which version of the Tamron are you considering? I have the Tamron 17-50 non VC (VC means Vibration Control, tamron's version of IS). This lens can be had for around $300 new in some places. Even though the non VC version is $200-$300 less than the version with VC, pictures taken with the non VC version of the lens have noticeably better IQ than the VC version (mainly the sharpness in the center of the frame). So, I would opt for the non VC version unless you NEED IS. Also realize that since this lens is 2.8, you'll be gaining stops of light at 50mm that you didn't have with the Canon.

Although the IQ of the Canon is good, the Tamron non VC IQ is just as good as the EF-S 17-55 2.8. The build quality is better than the Canon 18-55, but not near as good as the Canon 17-55.

All of the above are just lens specs, but the real question is what will you be using it for the that 18-55 can't achieve?

EDIT: The Tamron 17-50 2.8 can be sub par with focus in some low light situations.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mayt444
Senior Member
633 posts
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Central Oregon-High Desert
     
Dec 28, 2013 17:39 |  #5

Get the Sigma 17-70 OS or keep the 18-55. The Sigma has better range for a walk-around lens than the Tamron. If you need to shoot in low light use the 50 or 40.


Clay
Canon 70D, Canon G12 , Tamron SP 150-600mm Di VC USD, Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C, Canon 18-55 IS STM, 55-250 IS, Canon 50mm 1.8 II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
h14nha
Goldmember
Avatar
2,025 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 104
Joined Nov 2008
Location: South Wales, UK
     
Dec 28, 2013 17:47 |  #6

What do you shoot ? ? ?


Ian
There's no fool like an old skool fool :D
myflickr (external link)
My Gear - 7d, / 16-35mm F4 / 70-200 2.8 II / 100-400 / 300mm 2.8 / :D Fuji X Pro1 / XT-1 Graphite 18/35/56

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jbrackjr
Senior Member
481 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Georgia, USA
     
Dec 28, 2013 18:36 |  #7

Frodge wrote in post #16560294 (external link)
Hi folks. I want to know if it can seriously be justified replacing the 18-55 IS with the Tamron 17-50? I also own a 40mm 2.8 which I like as well as a 50mm 1.8 that I also like. I know the Tamron is a good lens, but is it worth it considering the lenses that I already have. I had a similar post about the sigma vs tamron, now I would like to know if it is actually worth dropping $500 considering what I already own.

I don't know because I have not tried out the 18-55 IS. However, I just bought a used copy of the Tamron non VC 17-50 about a week ago. Paid $275 and so far it is well worth the money. I have only used the lens in doors so far, It is very sharp and has good color. Focusing is a little noisy and it does hunt in low light.

For me, the Tamron will not replace my 15-85 as the zoom range is limited in comparison. But it could be helpful in situations where flash is not allowed, so I think I will keep the lens.


Jim
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EOS5DC
Senior Member
791 posts
Joined Dec 2013
     
Dec 28, 2013 18:55 |  #8
bannedPermanent ban

15-85 and a 35 f/2, IS or non.


Bodies: 60D, 6D.
EFs: 15-85, 10-22
EF: 28-75, 35 f/2 IS, Σ70-200 OS, 100-400L
Flash: 580EX II, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,159 posts
Gallery: 1633 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10248
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 29, 2013 19:21 |  #9

Frodge wrote in post #16560294 (external link)
Hi folks. I want to know if it can seriously be justified replacing the 18-55 IS with the Tamron 17-50? I also own a 40mm 2.8 which I like as well as a 50mm 1.8 that I also like. I know the Tamron is a good lens, but is it worth it considering the lenses that I already have. I had a similar post about the sigma vs tamron, now I would like to know if it is actually worth dropping $500 considering what I already own.

Heya,

Do you like wider apertures? If so, then replace teh 18-55 with something with constant aperture, like f2.8, in a light zoom. If you can't do that, then frankly, there's no sense in "upgrading" for the cost, as the 18-55 is actually a very good lens, it's just kit, so it gets less attention than something that is nearly the same, but costs $500. In my book, an upgrade better have something that really impacts the physical limitation or ability of your setup, such as going to wide aperture as a potential, for it to be an actual upgrade. Otherwise, you're just throwing money away and getting some experience with something different, but you're not gaining a physical upgrade.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,075 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 29, 2013 19:28 |  #10

MalVeauX wrote in post #16562774 (external link)
Heya,

Do you like wider apertures? If so, then replace teh 18-55 with something with constant aperture, like f2.8, in a light zoom. If you can't do that, then frankly, there's no sense in "upgrading" for the cost, as the 18-55 is actually a very good lens, it's just kit, so it gets less attention than something that is nearly the same, but costs $500. In my book, an upgrade better have something that really impacts the physical limitation or ability of your setup, such as going to wide aperture as a potential, for it to be an actual upgrade. Otherwise, you're just throwing money away and getting some experience with something different, but you're not gaining a physical upgrade.

Very best,

I was just about to order the lens and I checked in here 😳
I figures it was just faster and sharper and better for indoor lowlight. I have a 4month old around and wanted something a bit better. So not really worth it?


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qlayer2
OOOHHH! Pretty Moth!
Avatar
941 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 120
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Dec 29, 2013 19:50 |  #11

Do you have a flash? The 18-55 with a flash is as good or better than the Sigma and Tamron 17-50 IQ wise, the autofocus is better and quieter, and you have IS. The only reason to replace the lens is if you find yourself in low light situations where you need a faster aperture and you don't have or can't use a flash. I'd recommend getting a flash if you don't have one before upgrading to a faster zoom in a similar focal length, unless whatever you are shooting demands the faster aperture.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Dec 29, 2013 19:52 |  #12

mayt444 wrote in post #16560327 (external link)
Get the Sigma 17-70 OS or keep the 18-55. The Sigma has better range for a walk-around lens than the Tamron. If you need to shoot in low light use the 50 or 40.

That's what I did to replace my 18-55. The 17-70 OS offers faster aperture, faster focus, better IQ, better build, and a longer range for not very much in terms of price.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,159 posts
Gallery: 1633 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10248
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 29, 2013 20:01 |  #13

Frodge wrote in post #16562804 (external link)
I was just about to order the lens and I checked in here 😳
I figures it was just faster and sharper and better for indoor lowlight. I have a 4month old around and wanted something a bit better. So not really worth it?

Heya,

At constant f2.8, sure, it's a worthy upgrade in my book, if those are focal ranges you want. Personally, I would get a prime, with wider aperture to make it worth while. Like a 35mm f2 IS.

Ultimately the 18-55 will snap out amazing photos. Better glass doesn't just make it all better magically. If you bought an ETTL abled Flash, you could use that 18-55 to great extent no problem, in any light. For like $120, you could get the YN565EX TTL, with focus assist beam, ETTL flash mode, etc. Just point it at the ceiling for bounced flash. Single best upgrade you could possibly do for your photography, and especially for capturing a kid in low light situations.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,075 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 29, 2013 22:37 |  #14

Well I bought a 430exii and the tamron 17-50 non vc. After reading this thread, I'm going to probably cancel the lens from the order tomorrow morning. Thanks a lot guys.


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,075 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 30, 2013 07:35 |  #15

I'm literally on the fence in whether or not to cancel the lens part of my order from b&h. Have a 1/2 hour to decide. I feel like here is not really a concensus in whether or not it is good enough to replace the 18-55is


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

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

3,310 views & 0 likes for this thread
Justification in replacing canon 18-55 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 Ellie.outram2002
1080 guests, 316 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.