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

[Texas Parrothead]

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.

I have not been using the sb600 as I am hoping to keep with the natural light but will start to use it if I have to.

I have been keeping the ISO to 400 or lower.

I hear you about the D80 and it having more noise when cranking up the ISO.

What was bothering me the most about the Tamron was it had more noise than my Sigma 70-200 for the exact same shot (as close to exact as possible i.e Tamron at 50mm and Sigma at 70mm). Plus I really had a problem with the build quality. The zoom ring had a lot of play in it and I felt it everytime I touched the lens. I may have just gotten a bad copy. Right away the Sigma felt very solid.

Everything i have read indicates that both the Tamron and Sigma lenses are very good and comparable. It must have just been bad luck with my Tamron copy. But so far I really like the Sigma and have more confidence in it due to how it feels in my hand. I think that will go a long way in terms of my oppinion of the lens...whether it is sharper to the Tamron or not.

I am going on a trip to Colorado next week and will have plenty of opportunities to use it. I will be happy to give an update on how I like it after returning.

Thanks to all! This is a great forum!!!

 

[Offhand]

I used to have the Tamron 17-50 and thought it was a great lens. My friend purchased one shortly afterward but he got the VC version. We compared photos on many occasions and the non vc version was noticeably sharper in a number of photos. The only thing I didn't care about the lens was the motor noise. It was loud enough to be distracting in quiet settings.