Is the 17-50mm Tamron non-VC really better than the VC?

goldeneye243

goldeneye243

Suspended / Banned
Messages
127
Edit My Images
Yes
I have read lots of (old) reviews that say the non-VC version of the tamron 17-50mm is sharper than the VC, but I have also read some more recent reviews that say it is improved now. Any current opinions (ideally from people who have tried both)...
 
Hi goldeneye,

photozone have 2 recent(ish) reviews:-

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/642-tamron175028vcdx?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/637-tamron175028d7000?start=1

The non-vc has better edge performance wide open, and is a little sharper even closed down. However, i went for the vc version, as edge performance is generally not an issue when wide open, and i really like having a vr 17-50 2.8, can mean shutter speed close to a second hand held if you can brace against something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TBH when ever this lens is mentioned everyone pipes up "the old non vc is sharper"..a majority of these comments come from people that have not shot either let alone one of them.I have the vc version and its as sharp as I would like at 2.8 and some. They are both cracking lenses.There are lots of threads discussing the two on here and I have posted loads of samples at various apertures wide open 100% crops etc.
Anyhow heres a few at 2.8 for you


DSC_1675 by StuartHowePhotography, on Flickr


DSC_4529 by StuartHowePhotography, on Flickr


DSC_3914 by StuartHowePhotography, on Flickr

vc works well too!


vc on 3 by StuartHowePhotography, on Flickr
 
I picked up a used VC version off Ebay for a silly price and after using it have to say I am having a hard time finding a reason to keep my Canon 17-55mm IS.



Camera Canon EOS 7D
Lens Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 VC XR Di II LD Asp
Exposure 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture f/2.8
Focal Length 50 mm
ISO Speed 2000
 
StuartH said:
TBH when ever this lens is mentioned everyone pipes up "the old non vc is sharper"..a majority of these comments come from people that have not shot either let alone one of them.I have the vc version and its as sharp as I would like at 2.8 and some. They are both cracking lenses.There are lots of threads discussing the two on here and I have posted loads of samples at various apertures wide open 100% crops etc.
Anyhow heres a few at 2.8 for you

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuarthowephotography/8300082412/
DSC_1675 by StuartHowePhotography, on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuarthowephotography/7241236288/
DSC_4529 by StuartHowePhotography, on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuarthowephotography/7214502872/
DSC_3914 by StuartHowePhotography, on Flickr

vc works well too!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuarthowephotography/7214502596/
vc on 3 by StuartHowePhotography, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Stuart let me know if you want to sell that next month...I wouldn't mind taking it off your hands when I've recovered from my Tokina spend this month :)
 
Phil Young said:
Stuart let me know if you want to sell that next month...I wouldn't mind taking it off your hands when I've recovered from my Tokina spend this month :)
Click to expand...

Funny enough i was thinking of selling and getting a prime as i seldom use the wide end. It really is a cracking lens,built well and fantastic image quality for the price. Always been a fan of tamron lenses.:cool:
 
It seems hard to find any definitive comparisons.

Given that there is so much discussion and varying opinions must mean that there isn't any real world difference. I would assume given Tamron's reputation for poor Quality Control, that it depends on the copy you have more than the VC or Non-VC.

I had read on a post somewhere that the earlier vesions of the VC were soft, but this has been improved in recent ones (no evidence).

I have just ordered a non-VC 17-50mm for my 450D as an upgrade to the 18-55mm IS. I realistically expect that i may have to send it back for calibration, but i would assume the same had i went for the VC. in the end the non-VC fitted my budget.
 
Another VC vote, over the years I've had a number of examples of the non VC lens, (probably 5 or 6), and my current VC lens is sharper and made to a higher standard than the non VC (one of my non VCs had the whole front element fall out once, a lot of them suffer from a loose front ring caused by the screws going straight into the plastic ring rather than a proper metal insert).

I would always say that while the non VC is a good sharp lens, the VC is that bit better.
 
I returned my VC and got the non-VC instead...Worked much better with the D7000, there was eratic focus and all with the VC...I tried two different VCs in addition to the one I had, and also on another D7000 body...They were consistently much worse than the non-VC one..
 
dejongj said:
I returned my VC and got the non-VC instead...Worked much better with the D7000, there was eratic focus and all with the VC...I tried two different VCs in addition to the one I had, and also on another D7000 body...They were consistently much worse than the non-VC one..
Click to expand...

Stupid question perhaps...

Did you try turning off the VC??
 
Mm someone else I know from another forum experienced issues with the vc version and a d7000..was mainly focus issues too.
 
Phil Young said:
Stupid question perhaps...

Did you try turning off the VC??
Click to expand...

Oh yes, tried every combination. As I made the step up from my d70 I mainly doubted myself. I spend three hours back in the shop trying to determine with the resident pro what was going on. And with the variations we had consistent results.

StuartH said:
Mm someone else I know from another forum experienced issues with the vc version and a d7000..was mainly focus issues too.
Click to expand...

Might be me :) it was very subtly, rear screen wouldn't show it enough to be worried about. But on my 30" screen and laptop definitely visible. AF tune didn't make a difference as sometimes it was front and sometimes back.

Switched to the non vc and everything snapped in place :)
 
I'm itching to get one of these, would happily go second hand but can't get into the classifieds yet. What is the cheapest price for a new example?
 
I sent my first copy back, if you gonna get one i would by in the uk so you can return if its a bad copy. Or at least buy a grey import from a uk based store.
 
Last edited:
Just for information, when researching this myself i couldn't find a like for like comaprison on Photozone-de for Canon APS-C cameras. The old 17-50 non-vc review was done on an 8MP 350D years ago and then the VC version was done more recently on a 15Mp (i think) 50D. So even if it were the same lens it would have been comparing apples to pears given the completely different cameras used and their respective resolutions.


However, if you look up the two lens under the Nikon section you can get a very even playing field as both lens were tested quite recently in June 2011 on a 16MP?? Nikon Camera. The result of this test was that the non-vc came out better on sharpness.

JD
 
StuartH said:
Sample variation? [/url]
Click to expand...

Highly likely and as i said early in the thread "I would assume given Tamron's reputation for poor Quality Control, that it depends on the copy you have more than the VC or Non-VC".

But, i have to put my money somewhere, and would tend to base my choice more on the lab type tests by websites such as Photozone and The Digital Picture, which rightly or wrongly all seem to give the edge to the non-vc for sharpness (but not by much).

Personally i want to use the lens for taking photos of my kids and usually indoors, therefore i do care which is sharper wide open. Had this been a lens for still life or landscapre where VC is important and stopping down the norm then it would be a different ballgame, hell i would be happy just keeping my 18-55mm IS kit lens.
 
I have owned quite a few tamron lenses and never had an issue with any of them..sigma on the other hand!
As I have shown numerous times the vc is very sharp wide open.Each to their own I guess..look forward to seeing some wide open shots from you.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top