deviant art





Login
Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour Lost Password?
Deviant Login
Shop
 Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
[x]

Featured in Groups:

Details

November 16, 2009
Link
Thumb

Statistics

Comments: 3
Favourites: 0
Views: 116 (0 today)
[x]

.: Review: Tamron 17-50VC (Canon mount)




Review: Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di II VC LD IF (Canon mount)

I always waited for a (good) review on this lens (for canon mount) before I bought it,
now that I have it, why not make one on my own?

So here it is.

This lens meets the expectations. It features (like the non-VC version) a very good image quality, combined with an effective image-stabilization.
The Vibration Compensation begins its work directly after pushing the trigger half trough, just like the Auto Focus does. So the image should be stabilized right when the AF focused the motive. There is no 1 second delay before the VC-mechanism starts working. (At least in the Canon-mount)

With F2.8, 17mm at the wide end and a very good image-stabilizer, the lens is well-suited for available-light- and indoor-photography, as well as for every other situation with challenging light conditions.

Overall/haptics:
The lens looks nearly exactly like the Tamron 18-270VC, except that it is about half an inch shorter. It also uses the same 72mm filters. It feels solid and for the short length also a little bit heavy. The zoom ring turns to the right and has a convenient drag. All in all, pleasant.

Focus:
I experienced the AF to be fast and accurate. Due to the fact that the focus ring only rotates about 45 degrees, MF is a little bit delicate, but still easy enough. Works well in real world use.
I don't think that the AF sound is noisy or annoying.
My copy had a slight front-focus (less than 2mm, not objectionable in real-world use and easily compensated through the AF fine-adjustment of my EOS 50D)

Sharpness:
(Big GIF-image! 100% Crop)The Center-sharpness is very good wide open and excellent stopped down.

(100% Crop, bottom-left corner)Edge-sharpness is naturally worse, but still good.

(Light source at the bottom-left corner)Vignetting is noticeable wide open and well-controlled at F5.6, but

I neither had problems with vignetting, nor CA, nor barrel-distortion in real world use.

Canon or Tamron?:
I had a Canon F2.8, 17-55IS before and send it back to the merchant.
The Tamron does very well in comparision. The Canon AF was nearly inaudible, but in terms of speed, the Tamron nearly made an even match. In terms of accuracy, I even had less missed shots with the Tamron, espacially in difficult light situations and closer focus distances. I think it is also an even match in terms of sharpness. I experienced problems with CA with the Canon lens but I had none with Tamron.
The Tamron is smaller and comes with a lens hood. (Canon does not)  The price difference bought me an excellent tripod, a very cool camera-backpack and a B+W circular Polfilter, and I still had over 200 bucks left.
No regrets.

  • Mood: Love
Skin by `ginkgografix (modified by *Alandil-Lenard)
:iconwaynebenedet:
I like the way you wrote this article. I no longer use tamron lenses, but I found them t be excellent on older film based cameras.

Your first demonstration on sharpness is very telling, thought it moves a bit to fast for a detailed analysis. As one would expect, the lens achieves greatest sharpness stopped down to f-8 (or so). Then at f-18 it begins to supper from DOF degradation which is clearly visible in the f-32 example.

The fall off of the lens would trouble me, but software can correct it, so it would not be a big issue. Over all, I would suspect that this lens would be comparable to brand name (canon) lenses of similar range and would be a good choice for many people.

Great article, good demonstration.

--
"Seeing" the UNusual...EVERY DAY
Reply
:iconalandil-lenard:
Thank you very much for the comment. (Over 400 readers and no one dared to comment before^^)

In fact I only added f-13 and above only because I read about DOF degradation in your Journal once.

--
~
Reply
:iconwaynebenedet:
lol.... I wish I could type though... I just read my note you you again.... apparently according to me, lenses are to be eaten.... for supper no less.

You are welcome. As I said in my note, I enjoyed not only reading your about your experiments, but also looking at the results. Personally, I think it is really important to test your equipment, learn its limitations and know when not to push beyond them. Too many people ignore this to their own detriment.

As for the limits of your specific lens, adding the upper f-stops was a good idea and provided such a great demonstration too. I did a picture today where I needed f-16 to get the DOF I wanted at my preferred distance, but I knew the lens would not perform well, so I used f-11 and moved the camera back a few inches. That allowed me to retain the DOF I wanted but I had a bit more on the view screen that I would have preferred.

--
"Seeing" the UNusual...EVERY DAY
Reply
:icon:
Add a Comment: