T3i 18-55 Kit Lens Replacement - Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 Good Choice?

K

Kenneth Fisher

Active member
Hey Friends,

I finally broke down and got me a DSLR. I bought a T3i, and I have really enjoyed shooting stills with the Canon 50mm f/1.8.

I've shot with the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens some, but the variable aperture bugs me a little bit.

***

The Question: I've done some research, and it looks like the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non vibration control (VC) lens is a pretty good option to give me a very similar focal range to the kit lens, but it is faster and has a constant aperture.

It's gotten some pretty good reviews and it looks like it is a popular lens with the lower-end DSLR crowd.

I've been shooting almost all stills while I learn, but I will soon be shooting more video - is the Tamron a good choice for video shooting, especially as compared to the kit lens?

Any other recommendations for a good general use lens for a beginner? My limit is around the price range of the Tamron, about $450.

Thanks,

Ken
 
Last edited:
yes, great lens, and a nice upgrade from the kit lens if you don't need IS - you might want to see this recent thread: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?265435-Sigma-17-50mm-f2.8-OS - and my sharpness and bokeh tests: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html - http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html - also in video mode: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsv.html - and my equipment recommendations, where it is featured as a great basic option: http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html
 
Last edited:
Hi Norman, I've already come across your site just browsing this section so I'll see if I can find your Tamron tests.

In regard to image stabilization...for video I am much more of a tripod or monopod guy because I am not steady-handed. So I am not sure how much image stabilization will matter. And I really mean that I don't know, it might be important or it might not.

I've been shooting a lot of stills with the 50mm f/1.8 and I haven't felt the need for it yet. I assume IS is helpful but I would love to know from you and others whether they feel it is essential, very helpful, or just nice to have.

Ken
 
at these focal lengths, I'm pretty happy without IS - at 85mm and onwards (on APS-C), it is very welcome: without it, I need to get the camera on sticks (I don't have particularly steady hands, YMMV)
 
NormanBates said:
at these focal lengths, I'm pretty happy without IS - at 85mm and onwards (on APS-C), it is very welcome: without it, I need to get the camera on sticks (I don't have particularly steady hands, YMMV)
Click to expand...


I have to be honest, looking at your dollar bill tests, I found the Canon to be more eye-pleasing...I think it was more color than anything else, but the Canon also looked sharper at f/3.5 and f/5.6. That I did not expect. What is your opinion on their comparative image? And what I mean by that is not sharpness but what you find more appealing overall.

Ken
 
Last edited:
as you've noticed, the optical quality of the kit lens is very good; specifically, it is sharp wide open throughout its whole range, which is something very few lenses can say

the problems with it are that it is not constant aperture, and goes from slow in the 18mm end to very, very slow on the 55mm end, and that its build quality is absolutely awful

the tamron, on the other hand, is a fast constant aperture zoom; nice and sharp on the 17mm end; and whereas at 50mm is somewhat soft, it can still get to f/2.8, which makes it a half-decent budget alternative for portraits on APS-C

and it has a real focus ring: if you've used the 18-55, you'll know that it is built like a cheap toy: plastic mount, too light, it feels like it could dissolve in your hands if you squeezed it too hard... but the biggest construction issue is the focus ring: thin, with a very short throw (not that the tamron has it much longer), and it requires some ingenuity if you want to install focus gears on it

the tamron is a much better lens, but you can't beat the $75 price of the kit lens
 
So Norman, is there another way for me to consider using the same price range? Like buying another zoom lens, or some primes?

I really like using the 50mm f/1.8 prime, but it seems like kind of a pain in the ass to change lenses a lot.

I'm looking for recommendations or options I may not know of.
 
Kenneth Fisher said:
The Question: I've done some research, and it looks like the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non vibration control (VC) lens is a pretty good option to give me a very similar focal range to the kit lens, but it is faster and has a constant aperture.

Ken
Click to expand...

I traded up the 18-55 kit lens for the Tamron 17-50 non vc and it is way better for many reasons. I would make sure it says "Made in Japan" on the lens barrel because I did hear reliability issues on some Taiwan made lenses.
 
ROCKMORE said:
I traded up the 18-55 kit lens for the Tamron 17-50 non vc and it is way better for many reasons. I would make sure it says "Made in Japan" on the lens barrel because I did hear reliability issues on some Taiwan made lenses.
Click to expand...

Hi Michael,

It seems like the Tamron build quality is much better, and I definitely like a faster lens and constant aperture. What is your feeling about the comparison of the image quality of the Tamron 17 -50 vs. the Canon kit 18-55?

Ken
 
Kenneth Fisher said:
So Norman, is there another way for me to consider using the same price range? Like buying another zoom lens, or some primes?

I really like using the 50mm f/1.8 prime, but it seems like kind of a pain in the ass to change lenses a lot.

I'm looking for recommendations or options I may not know of.
Click to expand...

This is going to sound crazy, but I picked up a refurbished cheap T2i and keep my tamron on one and a 50mm F/1.4 on the other most of the time. Whatever the job calls for, I quickly swap cameras as needed. Another body is sometimes cheaper than expensive lenses.
 
M. Gilden said:
This is going to sound crazy, but I picked up a refurbished cheap T2i and keep my tamron on one and a 50mm F/1.4 on the other most of the time. Whatever the job calls for, I quickly swap cameras as needed. Another body is sometimes cheaper than expensive lenses.
Click to expand...

You are CRAZY!!

Just Kidding. So it sounds like you prefer the Tamron 17-50 to the Kit also? Do you have specific reasons?

Just so you know, I was leaning heavily toward buying the Tamron before I started this thread, and I am looking for Cons more than pros, just so I don't buy the Tamron out of sheer gear-lust. The biggest thing I have found to a con is that to me, in Norman Bates' lens tests, I thought the Canon kit lens shots looked nicer.
 
Last edited:
I've had the Tamron for a few years now. Very pleased. Is the IS on the Canon worth the price difference? Perhaps. If you're shooting handheld, it's a must. So hold on to the kit lens for handheld as long as you don't need the speed.
 
there are lots of other nice $400 lenses... but they are usually primes; I don't mind changing lenses in order to get the best image possible, but you may not have the time or the will to do so; my father started photography as a lazy beginner, I got him the tokina 11-16, tamron 17-50, and tamron 70-300; then I forced him to use the 50mm f/1.8, and he loved it; I got him the 24mm f/2.8, and he loved it; now he wants all primes!! and that's even though he's not willing to focus manually, so he won't try the samyang primes (which are usually a lot better for the price); even so, he enjoyed his tamron 17-50 for a year and a half before falling for primes, and he still uses it on trips; anyway, go here: http://www.similaar.com/foto/tuten/110.html and here http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html
 
When I bought my Canon 600D(T3i) I went cheap & bought the Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 VC instead of the Canon 17-55mm F/2.8 IS as it was half the price of the Canon lens. I returned the Tamron the next day as it was so inferior to a decent Canon lens. The IS was really noisy, the AF was slow, the focus & zoom rings rotate the wrong way, you need to slide the switch from AF to MF when manually focusing or you fight the AF motor. There were probably other things that bugged me that I don't recall now but the Canon lens is just so much better that it is easily worth the money even if it did cost more than the camera.
 
Hey Ken, if you're only shooting video and have no need for autofocus, get the tamron. If you are going to shoot stills for clients you need to double check the tamron as many copies of this lens will miss focus, usually by focusing in front of where they should. This then leads to repeatedly soft images, especially when trying to hit infinity focus on a wide shot. Although the canon 17-55/2.8 is double the price you end up getting what you paid for, especially when it comes to AF
 
nigelbb said:
When I bought my Canon 600D(T3i) I went cheap & bought the Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 VC instead of the Canon 17-55mm F/2.8 IS as it was half the price of the Canon lens. I returned the Tamron the next day as it was so inferior to a decent Canon lens. The IS was really noisy, the AF was slow, the focus & zoom rings rotate the wrong way, you need to slide the switch from AF to MF when manually focusing or you fight the AF motor. There were probably other things that bugged me that I don't recall now but the Canon lens is just so much better that it is easily worth the money even if it did cost more than the camera.
Click to expand...

It is well known that the VC version is inferior. When folks here recommend the Tamron, we are only talking about the non-VC one.
If you need image stabilization, I also would generally recommend Canon over third parties.
 
I think the 18-55 kit lens is also very sharp and does have IS, but the construction is on the cheap side and with the slower and variable aperture not the best for HD video. It's also not quite as wide as the Tamron. I tested my Kit lens against my 24mm f 2.8 Canon prime @ 24 and could not see much difference in sharpness so the kit lens will hold up for sharpness.
It all comes down to what is in front of the lens. Fantastic images can be taken with many different lenses.
 
NormanBates said:
there are lots of other nice $400 lenses... but they are usually primes; I don't mind changing lenses in order to get the best image possible, but you may not have the time or the will to do so; my father started photography as a lazy beginner, I got him the tokina 11-16, tamron 17-50, and tamron 70-300; then I forced him to use the 50mm f/1.8, and he loved it; I got him the 24mm f/2.8, and he loved it; now he wants all primes!! and that's even though he's not willing to focus manually, so he won't try the samyang primes (which are usually a lot better for the price); even so, he enjoyed his tamron 17-50 for a year and a half before falling for primes, and he still uses it on trips; anyway, go here: http://www.similaar.com/foto/tuten/110.html and here http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html
Click to expand...

I definitely want to get a nice set of primes. I think I will end up preferring primes. I have been slowly wading through the vintage lens thread in the APS-C section.

So far I have also found I much prefer manual focusing to autofocusing. That might be because the 50mm f1.8 has a slow and dodgy autofocus. I find I can do it pretty fast and I have gotten better with each session. I haven't even tried autofocusing with the kit lens yet.

The reason I am looking around for a zoom, is that I feel I need/want a lens that I can use for situations where I can't ask people to stand and wait for me to switch lenses, or I may not have enough room to position myself. Think family gatherings or other tight quarter situations, or grabbing a quick snap on the street.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top