# 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.


----------



## Texas Parrothead (Mar 10, 2011)

AtlPikMan said:


> 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 (Mar 10, 2011)

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.


----------

