hello
looking to buy a 17-50 lens f/2.8, any recommendations?
i have doubts among which the lens will be better, sigma, Tokina or Tamron.
Thanks in advance for your help
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
[quote name='gustavo' timestamp='1309345812' post='9611']
hello
looking to buy a 17-50 lens f/2.8, any recommendations?
i have doubts among which the lens will be better, sigma, Tokina or Tamron.
Thanks in advance for your help
[/quote]
I would go for the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM. Contrasty for the type of lens, better build quality than the Tamrons, better CA at the wide end than the Tamron non-VC.
And good image stabilization.
Posts: 430
Threads: 7
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
I would consider the "Tamron 17-50/2-8 VC".
Just my 2cts ... Rainer
All I know - all reviews and tests I read, I don't own the lens - say, that the older non-VC Tamron 2,8/17-50 has by far better IQ.
I tested the old Tamron 2,8/17-50 and the Sigma 2,8/17-50 OS. Tamron has exceptional cost/performance ratio, is smaller and lighter, zoom-ring works smoother, IQ is similar. BUT: Sigma has OS.
It's up to you, whether OS is worth the extra money and weight.
Lars
[quote name='Rainer' timestamp='1309416577' post='9621']
I would consider the "Tamron 17-50/2-8 VC".
Just my 2cts ... Rainer
[/quote]
I am looking to buy the 17-50 VC for the 60D, anyone using this combination? In the PZ review are the MTF figures with VC on or off?
[quote name='vickylou' timestamp='1310022663' post='9781']
I am looking to buy the 17-50 VC for the 60D, anyone using this combination? In the PZ review are the MTF figures with VC on or off?
[/quote]
SInce all PZ test are done in tripod, the VC must be switched off. As far as I know tamron VC stilldoesn't offer tripod detection.
[quote name='miro' timestamp='1310023144' post='9783']
SInce all PZ test are done in tripod, the VC must be switched off. As far as I know tamron VC stilldoesn't offer tripod detection.
[/quote]
As alot of my shots will be hand held it would be very interesting to compare the 2 hand held with VC on on the VC version.
[quote name='Lars' timestamp='1309442998' post='9636']
All I know - all reviews and tests I read, I don't own the lens - say, that the older non-VC Tamron 2,8/17-50 has by far better IQ.
I tested the old Tamron 2,8/17-50 and the Sigma 2,8/17-50 OS. Tamron has exceptional cost/performance ratio, is smaller and lighter, zoom-ring works smoother, IQ is similar. BUT: Sigma has OS.
It's up to you, whether OS is worth the extra money and weight.
Lars
[/quote]
Hello Lars,
Thanks for the info. In this focal range I only have Tamron 17-50 non VC. I have never test it against other zooms. My experience match very well the Internet reviews of this lens except only one criteria, the build quality. Seay it other way around – there is no Internet review site that says that Tamron 17-50/2,8 has very good build quality.
I have this lens for 5 years. As amateur photographer I use this lens to photograph my kids and occasionally for wedding parties. My passions are see/landscapes and I find this focal range boring. If I need exceptional IQ or zoom range or speed I attach this lens.
- It is the most flare resistant lens that I have.
- A little bit soft at 2,8 but above 4.0; 5,6 is razor sharp.
- With little care survive in any outdoor conditions. Including two fall off from tripod, once in concrete and once in grass/soil. Mechanical and optical it is as good as new.
[quote name='vickylou' timestamp='1310023962' post='9784']
As alot of my shots will be hand held it would be very interesting to compare the 2 hand held with VC on on the VC version.
[/quote]
If you want the maximum resolution, you either want a tripod or you want a short exposure time, where the latter resembles the former for sufficiently short exposure times. VC will help neither on a tripod nor for millisecond exposures.
If you want to take hand-held shots with medium shutter times, the resolution is certainly not limited by the optical design and the VC version will definitely be helpful.
Decide which of the two is your use case and then get one or the other lens. But hand-held MTF measurements are certainly nonsense.
Posts: 7,999
Threads: 1,849
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
[quote name='vickylou' timestamp='1310023962' post='9784']
As alot of my shots will be hand held it would be very interesting to compare the 2 hand held with VC on on the VC version.
[/quote]
Technically this is not possible in the scope of an MTF analysis. The margin of error in a hand-held shots is simply way to high. Just move a few cm back and forth and the numbers are way off.
It is possible to do a "field" analysis though ... with some limitations of course.
However, PERSONALLY I'm always trying to shoot much faster than "suggested" in order to avoid blur - regardless of whether a lens has IS/VC/VR or not - even at the expense of a higher ISO setting if necessary.
