50d + Tamron 17-50 VC 2.8

[idrive]

Guys,

About to commit to purchasing the above combination.

After weighing up the 550d versus 50d i've decided the 50d suits my requirements (ie: no video required and prefer the feel of the 50d).

My question last decision is whether to get the 17-50 2.8 lens - Based on the fact i'll be looking at shooting indoors, portraits, kids and a bit of sport, landscapes etc.

I'd appreciate thoughts on the above lens and whether i should be looking at anything else in same price point.

Cheers

[old dog]

I think that would be a terrific starting point....good lens, great price, versatile, VC.....

[twister]

The common consensus is that the non-VC version is sharper than the VC...

[andylo]

I am agree to what twister said. If you are a bit of pixel peeper, get the non VC version. I have tried both and the non VC is significantly sharper!

[ApfDaMan]

i own the tammy 17-50 f/2.8 and damn it is sharp. its on a 500D. i havent had the VC version to compare it with but its read and seen a lot of comparisons on the net. but im a bit insane so currently considering the canon 17-55mm f/2.8 because it has USM, IS, and full time manual focus. i dont mine the extra weight / size but i am kinda annoyed it doesnt come with a lens hood.

[idrive]

Mmm really appreciate the feedback - I have just completed some additional reading, lets just say that it is a difficult decison and i am now leaning towards the non vc!!! Maybe put the extra $ towards a nifty 50 OR external flash....

Would it be fair to say that having VC on a lens of this focal length isn't really that important? OR based on the fact that i'll be using this lens inside with varied lighting it could be of benefit?

[arthurking83]

Mmm really appreciate the feedback - I have just completed some additional reading, lets just say that it is a difficult decison and i am now leaning towards the non vc!!! Maybe put the extra $ towards a nifty 50 OR external flash....

Would it be fair to say that having VC on a lens of this focal length isn't really that important? OR based on the fact that i'll be using this lens inside with varied lighting it could be of benefit?

I was about to make a comment based on those exact same thoughts! :th3:

VC can be a bonus even at short focal lengths too.. it depends on exactly what type of photography you do.
I don't use it much(having access to a allrounder lens rather than image stabilisation on a faster aperture lens.. but I some times do and don't use it .. it still helps

I suppose you could use it for landscape shoots, but I wouldn't. I prefer the tried and true tripod method. Having said that, you can't always take a tripod or even open a tripod in ever single situation.. VC can be handy then!
(in about 10,000+ shot situations, I think I remember only once, where I couldn't use my tripod for a lack of space to even open it up!.. a small narrow metal gantry with gridded base that only let the tripod feet slip through. I then tried to open the legs fully and rest it on the and rails and noticed that the gantry swayed a lot more from side to side than I realised as I walked over it. in that case the tripod was useless.

[twister]

Mmm really appreciate the feedback - I have just completed some additional reading, lets just say that it is a difficult decison and i am now leaning towards the non vc!!! Maybe put the extra $ towards a nifty 50 OR external flash....

Would it be fair to say that having VC on a lens of this focal length isn't really that important? OR based on the fact that i'll be using this lens inside with varied lighting it could be of benefit?

It depends...if using it in low-light situations, you would do better with the VC...but whether the VC version is worth the extra cost and lower IQ is a matter of some debate...


considering the canon 17-55mm f/2.8 because it has USM, IS, and full time manual focus. i dont mine the extra weight / size but i am kinda annoyed it doesnt come with a lens hood.

I am in a quandary with that as well...considering the price, it's stupid the lens doesn't come with a hood or case...

[stevo]

I've had a couple of Tamron 17-50 f/2.8's and they were both razor sharp lenses.

Coupled with the 50D it'd be great general set up.

I'd go NON VC and throw in a nifty fifty just because you can't go wrong for the price

[mikew09]

Great Choice, I have the non VC version and it is as sharp as a butchers knife. I use it for landscape (until I get my wide angle), portrait and general usage - I have no intention of changing it either so I think you are on the money not to mention this is a great 2.8 lens for the price. I have a 70-200 L for sporting and I think you would find the lens a little short for sport. A very good choice first up - my only other suggestion is to use the 50D micro adjust to get the best out of the lens, infact any lens you purchase.

Mike

[idrive]

Done - non VC it is....

Now the waiting game begins - can't wait for it to arrive......

Thanks for all the input.

[Gremlin]

is this the same load of numbers and letters to what your getting?
SP AF 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di-II LD

there seems to be a few of the 2.8s around either that or Im just easily confused by loads of letters and numbers!

[idrive]

That is the one - Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di-II LD Lenses

[Gremlin]

oh cool Ive been looking at the right one then! Thanks :)

Happy Gremlin

[cupic]

That is the one - Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di-II LD Lenses

+1 Also very happy with this glass


cheers

[Arg]

There's a new Sigma OS (VC) that tested very well at photozonedotde and is probably in the similar price range (actually you could mention the price of the tamrom i don't know it well). Arg

[ZedEx]

I've owned the 17-50 f2.8 tammy (non VC). Extremely good lens on my 40D, if I hadn't have gone up to a 5D with a 24-70f2.8 i'd still be using it. They're tough little buggers too! I accidentally topped my old 190D manfrotto (full height) straight over onto concrete with the tammy on my 40D. The lens hood was history, the filter ring broke and the UV filter smashed but the lens still zooms, focusses and is as sharp as ever haha