Tamron 17-50 VC

[RendX]

So the new Tamron 17-50 with IS has been released. I think it's on order at Henry's for about $650.

Anyone have one already or going to bite?

Some initial reviews

(in Japanese)
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/r...17_315883.html

http://www.salvomolinaro.com/2009/09...2-8-vc-review/

Thoughts? Might not be so bad for APS-C sensors. Wonder how it compares to the 17-55 IS...

[gotak]

Umm. at that price it's a big question since it's so close to the canon. Might make sense to get the 17-55 and get USM as well as IS.

Filter sizes again different so screw me over again :P.

For now I'll keep my 17-50 without VC unless the VC version is actually compellingly better in image quality.

[DualSoul]

Umm. at that price it's a big question since it's so close to the canon. Might make sense to get the 17-55 and get USM as well as IS.

Filter sizes again different so screw me over again :P.

For now I'll keep my 17-50 without VC unless the VC version is actually compellingly better in image quality.

$650 is close to >$1000 (for the Canon 17-55mm)? And VC is Tamron's IS, so the only thing missing would be the 5mm on the long end and USM (though apparently the focus speed has been slightly improved compared to the non-VC).

[gotak]

I mean it's getting close so if you want the improvements over the non VC version it might be worth the wait to save up the 400 dollars in difference to get the 17-55.

[Lulz]

I mean it's getting close so if you want the improvements over the non VC version it might be worth the wait to save up the 400 dollars in difference to get the 17-55.

if people followed the "for only xyz dollars more i can get this" logic, then what's stopping everyone from getting D300 instead of D90 (only $400 more) or 70-200 f/4 IS instead of 70-200 f/4 (only $400 more) etc etc =)

[Kasakato]

if people followed the "for only xyz dollars more i can get this" logic, then what's stopping everyone from getting D300 instead of D90 (only $400 more) or 70-200 f/4 IS instead of 70-200 f/4 (only $400 more) etc etc =)

The $400.

[Kasakato]

I've read that AF is still not so great, especially in low light. What good is VC if it doesn't focus in low light.

[sfu_engineer]

Manual focus.

[Kasakato]

Manual focus.

Too lazy; for another $400, I'd go with the used Nikkor. AF is valuable.

[vincent-poon]

hmm, in the review it states the focus is very fast, a lot faster than the old version.
Maybe i should go try it hands on...

[tdotcbc84]

I just bought one last week at Aden~!

I compared the old non-vc version ... and the new version just feels better...

72mm vs 67mm.....

As for the focus.. it still isn't as good as Nikon's AF-S... but it is definitely better than Nikon's AF.... and as well... faster than the old non-vc version.

As for picture.... it is definitely not super sharp at 2.8... (not many lenses are wide open anyways!)....

but when I stop down to F4 or F5.6... you can actually see the lens perform VERY VERY well... even in camera !

As for VC.... it definitely helps a lot for me.. as I like to take a lot of indoor pictures.... shooting at 1/15 or 1/13 shutter speed.... i don't worry at all ! Add in 2.8.... and you got a great indoor lens!

[KorruptioN]

I've read that AF is still not so great, especially in low light. What good is VC if it doesn't focus in low light.

Wouldn't AF also be dependent on the body? Some lenses function better on some systems, than others.

[Kasakato]

Wouldn't AF also be dependent on the body? Some lenses function better on some systems, than others.

To a degree. Though Nikon's system is usually fairly fast and accurate, the lens seems to be the biggest factor.

[goofball]

To a degree. Though Nikon's system is usually fairly fast and accurate, the lens seems to be the biggest factor.

I'd disagree to a degree. Use a D300 and compare to a D90 for focusing with the regular AF lenses and you will see a difference. The Prosumer cameras like D200/300 are faster at focusing than their consumer counterparts (D80/D90).

This looks interesting but quite expensive compared to their original A16N model. I'd surely hope they updated/improved the opticals on it and not just added VC plus an old gear motor internally for pseudo AF-S compliance on Nikon.

[Kasakato]

I'd disagree to a degree. Use a D300 and compare to a D90 for focusing with the regular AF lenses and you will see a difference. The Prosumer cameras like D200/300 are faster at focusing than their consumer counterparts (D80/D90).

This looks interesting but quite expensive compared to their original A16N model. I'd surely hope they updated/improved the opticals on it and not just added VC plus an old gear motor internally for pseudo AF-S compliance on Nikon.

Sorry, guess I should have specified that it would only apply to AF-S/AF-N/lenses with built in motors. The body, in the case of a screw driven lens would differently make a difference, no question there.