I have seen these 2 lenses being suggested by many people across the site as general purpose zooms & an upgrade to lớn the typical 18-55mm kit lenses. The price difference seems khổng lồ be around $200 (~INR 10,000) between the two. The lenses are also considerably cheaper than their CanonNikon counterparts.

Bạn đang xem: Tamron 17 50 review

Having using the stabilized kit lens on Canon, I appreciate the importance of ISVC for slow shutter speeds (not just low light, but also for effects). However, quite a few reviews seem to lớn suggest that the non-VC version seems khổng lồ be better optically overall. There seem lớn be more chất lượng control issues with the VC version as well.

My question is two fold:

How do the 2 lenses compare against each other - is the premium for the VC version worthwhile for the chất lượng trade-off?
Improve this question
edited Apr 13, 2017 at 12:44

asked Dec 4, 2011 at 5:32

4,64544 gold badges3737 silver badges6464 bronze badges
showroom a comment |

5 Answers 5

Sorted by: Reset to default
Highest score (default) Date modified (newest first) Date created (oldest first)
I have the VC version (Nikon mount). I have tested it alongside my 50mm prime và found it lớn be just as sharp at f/3.2. It is very slightly softer at f/2.8, but only when looking at an artificial chạy thử pattern. That"s one person"s opinion based on a sample of one.

I have tested other non-professional zoom lenses (Nikon & Sigma) & the Tamron is far, far sharper than any of them. Unbelievably so.

A camera shop owner I know recommended the non-VC version as being very sharp và reliable (and inexpensive). He didn"t say it was worth buying the non-VC version over the VC version. He just recommended it highly as a fantastic value. He did say he"d also sold a lot of the VC version và hadn"t noticed any quality control issues.

Because the lens is sharp wide open, VC isn"t really vital except in low light. I would say the VC is probably not worth the premium unless you intend to shoot a lot of low-light or indoors work without flash.

Can"t help with the comparison to lớn the Canon 18-55mm. I would imagine from what I"ve found compared lớn other Nikon equivalents that the Tamron will be noticeably sharper, especially wide open. You can use it at 2.8 or 3.2, whereas the Canon probably needs to be stopped down khổng lồ f/5.6 or f/8 to be at its sharpest.


Category: Camera Lens for Canon
Price: P13,500Bought at: Henry’s Camera (Hidalgo Branch)

It"s 2013– Perfect Renders just welcomed to lớn its camera equipment family the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 Non-VC lens for Canon! After using the Canon 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens for so long on both of my cameras, I felt the urgent need lớn upgrade mainly due khổng lồ our videos being either too dark or too grainy with high ISO when indoors.

I bought mine at Henry’s Camera at Hidalgo St., Quiapo, Manila for P13,500 PHP along with an Enovation 67mm UV lens filter for 500 PHP. I wasn’t planning on buying the UV lens filter at first, but I underestimated the sale skills of the saleslady- after suggesting me to buy the filter, she pointed to my old lens & said “Look, it’s full of fingerprints. You don’t want that on your new lens.” và then bam! Checkmate.


There are two versions of this lens– the Non-VC, which I got, và the VC version. The latter costs 17,500 PHP và comes with the VC feature which stands for ‘Vibration Compensation.’ This means the lens reduces the blur caused by camera shake on your photos but it also comes with the price of softer-looking photos. Upon reading countless review online, the verdict was to lớn go with the Non-VC.

Why not buy the Canon 17-55mm F2.8? Well, for starters, it friggin’ costs 38,500 PHP! That’s almost thrice the price I paid for. Và in terms of comparison, it’s already canon that the Canon (hehe) only beats the Tamron with faster and quieter auto-focusing as well as better build quality. Sharpness and image unique are at par. If I have such cash at hand, I’d rather buy the Tamron và use the rest with other equipment.

There’s also the Sigma 17-50mm F2.8, but 24,700 PHP is still pretty expensive for me.



Model: A16Lens Construction (Groups/Elements):13/16Angle of View:78°45′-31°11′ (APS-C kích thước equivalent)Diaphragm Blade Number:7Minimum Aperture:F/32Minimum Focus Distance:10.6in.(0.27m)Macro Magnification Ratio:1:4.5 (at f=50mm MFD 0.27m)Filter Diameter:ø67Weight:430g (15.2oz)Diameter x Length:ø2.9 x 3.3in. (ø74.0 x 81.7mm)Accessory:Flower-shaped lens hoodMount:Canon, Nikon with Built-In Motor, Pentax, Sony A mount

Let’s compare the Tamron with my old Canon lens with the ff. Thử nghiệm shots:

1.) C 18mm vs T 17mm (F3.5 1/4 ISO 400)

We see here the 1mm difference between the two, with the Tamron having a bit wider coverage.


2.) C 18mm F3.5 vs T 17mm F2.8 (1/10 ISO 400)

The Canon’s widest aperture vs the Tamron. The latter’s F2.8 adds more leeway in darker environments.


3.) C 35mm vs T 35mm (F4.5 0″3 ISO 400)

Same setting in everything. Somehow the Tamron views the black subject more vividly.


4.) C 18mm vs T 17mm (F16 2″5 ISO 400)

Both at F16, the Tamron has somewhat sharper chất lượng on both subjects. Zoom in lớn see.


5.) C 55mm vs T 50mm (F5.6 1″6 ISO 100)

Canon’s better zoom with the 55mm vs. Tamron’s 50mm.


6.) C 55mm F5.6 vs T 50mm F2.8 (1/4 ISO 100)

This is where Tamron beats the crap out of the Canon lens- at 55mm, Canon’s aperture can only be widest at F5.6 while the Tamron can maintain it’s F2.8 even at 50mm, thus bringing in more light.

Xem thêm: 40+ Tranh Spa Treo Tường Trang Trí Thẩm Mỹ Viện Đẹp Nhất 2023


So overall, is it a good buy? Definitely! I can’t wait to try this out on my upcoming projects.