17-50mm VC vs non-VC


Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 14, 2008
95
0
0
#1
I'm planning to replace my Canon kit lens with Tamron 17-50mm. Heard some bad comments on Tamron VC lens in terms of sharpness etc and it seems that non-VC one performs better. Please share your experience if you have experienced any of the lenses.

Thanks:)
 

NovJoe

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2009
5,650
0
0
~Sunny Little Island~
#2
I've seen a Tammy 17-50 VC on my friend's D300 and it was very sharp. Not sure about the non VC.
 

Shen siung

Senior Member
May 21, 2008
2,597
0
36
#4
I'm planning to replace my Canon kit lens with Tamron 17-50mm. Heard some bad comments on Tamron VC lens in terms of sharpness etc and it seems that non-VC one performs better. Please share your experience if you have experienced any of the lenses.

Thanks:)
I own the non VC, I would suggest you just get the non VC. Unless, you willing to wait for some review (as far as I know don't have any currently) showing the VC version actually provides better "VC" when shoot at low shutter speed with VC is on.

It is quite true that, the feeling of "I don't have IS / VC.... something lacking... " might sometimes bother you, but the real situation is 17-50 non VC has been known as good, sharp lens. at 50mm VC might help, but if really when needs, you may just increase ISO. Save the $$ for other items.

There are a few threads talking about this in Canon sud forum and Tamron sub forum. Actually the sharpness of VC version seems similar to the non VC, so it comes to whether worth paying the extra $$ for VC.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom