# Tamron 17-50mm vc verses non vc



## jaomul (Apr 18, 2012)

Hi all. While reviews seem to favour the shapness of the non vc lens it is nice to have the stabilization feature. One of these will be my next lens but has anyone used both and if so which one do you recommend and why? Thanks


----------



## jriepe (Apr 18, 2012)

I have the non VC version and like it very much.  VC may be important if shooting in low light without flash but I never do that so it's not important to me in a lens of this focal length.  I definitely would not trade off sharpness for VC not to mention the cost difference.  VC is very important to me on my Tamron 70-300 but not on my 17-50.

Jerry


----------



## Dao (Apr 18, 2012)

I have the non-VC version for couple years.  And I still have not run into a situation that I needed to say "Man, I wish I have the VC with this lens".


----------



## jaomul (Apr 18, 2012)

Thanks. I think it will be the non-vc version so


----------



## ghache (Apr 18, 2012)

I have the non-vc version and its pretty damn sharp, 





















these where all taken with that lens at about F4-F7.1. however its still sharp at F2.8. I try to shoot it on the long end when wide open because at 17mm wide open its kinda soft,


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Apr 18, 2012)

I prefer vibration reduction than none. They help my shaky hands a lot. The slight increase of sharpness is not worth the loss of vibration reduction IMHO.


----------

