Tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC or not to VC

Texas Parrothead · Feb 17, 2011

Hi all

Just joined the forums but have been reading here for a couple of years.

I just bought the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 non OS yesterday and can not be more thrilled with it's low light photo quality after just playing with it at home last night! I am really loving this lens right now!

I want to get a 17-50mm 2.8 lens for pics around the house. A lot of my pictures are taken at night of the toddlers after I get home from work so I am almost always shooting low light.

I have pretty much decided on the Tamron and can get the non VC on e-bay new for about $350 and the VC for about $450. Given my type of usuage will I benefit from the VC?

Also any concerns buying from e-bay from a well established e-bay store with very good feedback? It will save me about $100 - $200 dollars.

Thanks all!

Current equipment:
Nikon D80
18-135mm kit lens
Nikkor 50mm f1.8
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 non OS
Nikon SB-600

altitude604 · Feb 17, 2011

if you can afford the extra few bucks for the VC then might as well veni vidi vc.

Texas Parrothead · Feb 17, 2011

How about buying from e-bay stores? If they have good feedback are there any issues or things I should keep an eye out for?

subscuck · Feb 17, 2011

VC (or OS, VR, IS) won't stop action, you still need a fast enough shutter speed for that. How fast do your toddlers move? Or are you usually taking pics of them while they're idle? Even still, image stabilization is nice to have, and works great when used within it's limitations. If you can swing the extra $, get the VC version. I've never owned either version, so I'm not sure how different, if at all, they are optically.

Charles89 · Feb 18, 2011

I have the non VC version for Canon. Its great really, except for the noisy focus. I read somewhere that the non-VC had a little better image quality.

Dunno if it helps, but thats what I had to say on the subject

Texas Parrothead · Feb 18, 2011

subscuck said:
VC (or OS, VR, IS) won't stop action, you still need a fast enough shutter speed for that. How fast do your toddlers move? Or are you usually taking pics of them while they're idle? Even still, image stabilization is nice to have, and works great when used within it's limitations. If you can swing the extra $, get the VC version. I've never owned either version, so I'm not sure how different, if at all, they are optically.

The kids are 1yr and 3yr so about 50% of the time they are moving. I anticipate the spead at which they move will only continue to increase with age. I am thinking I might end up going with the non VC because I don't think I will have enough money to purchase for a while and I would like to make my purchase as soon as possible as I hear lens prices will be going up by about 10% over the next couple of weeks.

Texas Parrothead · Feb 18, 2011

Charles89 said:
I have the non VC version for Canon. Its great really, except for the noisy focus. I read somewhere that the non-VC had a little better image quality.

Dunno if it helps, but thats what I had to say on the subject

Thanks! That is great to hear. I think I can get the non VC version for about $330 on ebay now.

Texas Parrothead · Mar 7, 2011

Just an update....Was able to pick up the VC version last week and use it for my son/daughters combined birthday party this weekend.

I am not as impressed with this lens as i am with my Sigma 70-200 2.8. I tend to get a lot more noise with this lens compared to the Sigma.

Anyone else have this issue with this lens? Is it possibel i got a bad copy?

I bought it new from a local photo shop so not sure if I can swap it our for a diff copy.

PhotoWrangler · Mar 7, 2011

Crap! Ignore my pm then... LOL

Sw1tchFX · Mar 7, 2011

I've heard the non VC version is a bit sharper.

Dao · Mar 7, 2011

For indoor birthday party type situation, I'd rather use kit lens with a decent hotshoe flash that allow you do bounce the light. So in your situation, I will pick up the non-VC version and use the extra money to buy a flash instead.

As for the noise issue, what were photos' ISO settings? Underexposed photos and brighten up with post processing? Those are couple factors for noisy photos.

Texas Parrothead · Mar 9, 2011

Just a quick update....so I took back the Tamron this morning and picked up the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 OS version.

Hoping I will get the results I want with this one regarding lower noise and sharper images.

I will let you know if I see any noticable difference.

PhotoWrangler · Mar 9, 2011

Texas Parrothead said:
Just a quick update....so I took back the Tamron this morning and picked up the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 OS version.

Hoping I will get the results I want with this one regarding lower noise and sharper images.

I will let you know if I see any noticable difference.

Good luck.... Sigma's quality control is known to be shotty. May take you three Sigma lenses before you find the perfect one for you.

Texas Parrothead · Mar 10, 2011

The build quality on the Sigma is much better and so far the lens is performing very well.

I still need some more time with it though.

Thanks!

AtlPikMan · Mar 10, 2011

I would have gone with the Non VC version, I had one and it wasnt bad for what it cost. Now for the noise....Are you shooting with your sb600? What was your iso settings? Im not understanding how what lens you used affected noise in your pics. I use to have a D80, whenever i had to crank up the iso...noise was an issue...no matter what lens i used.