Tamron 17-50mm VC take the place of Canon 17-55 EF-S

J

jrod81

Veteran
Hey guys,
In an effort to save money (yet again) I am vouching to go with the Tamron 17-50mm w/ the VC option instead of the Canon 17-55. I really don't see any reason to get into whether VC is needed or not because there are so many other posts on the matter. Also I realize that the Canon lens is probably better glass, but I am just wanting to hear input on if this is a wise decision.
I am selling the stock lens that came with the 7d on ebay right now. When that sells I should have enough to buy the Tamron. It is out isn't it? Its on ebay but another forum member had said he was "waiting on it to come out."
thanks guys
jared
 
The VC version for Canon is out, but it's hard to find. I called Tamron and they said certain places have it. I called 4 or 5 places, but they did not have it. I then walked into Samy's Camera in Culver City and they had the VC version for Canon and the salesperson showed it to me. The only place I've been able to find it so far. Should be more available soon.
 
hey stephenmick, thanks for that link... i guess back at ya with the same words... if you decide you could take a bit less, let me know...
i found one in louisville,ky craigslist a while back for $650 and couldn't get to it in time and have been kicking myself since
 
JRod-

I'm not selling mine. I love it. That's just a link to someone who is selling one for a pretty decent price.

Can't say I've had any dirt or dust issues to speak of with the lens, either.

--SM
 
I have the Tamron 2.8 IS that you've been talking about. I managed to get it from Amazon while they were available. I don't have much to compare it to in the same spec lens, other than the 28-135 kit lens that came with it.

I bought it based on good reviews for it's Nikon version, which has been out for a while, and the previous non-IS Canon version. Based on the reviews it seemed the best bang for the buck in a EF-S IS mid range all purpose zoom. For a f2.8 it's quite compact and you can get a reasonably sharp, fast lens. I haven't put it through it's paces or done much evaluation other than just using it. I'm thinking the video on the 7D resolution is much lower than what the Tamron is capable of, so perhaps the super L lenses are a bit of a luxury for video mode.

I would recommend IS for all applications, and it works ok with video. IS just gives you another option, and for stills gives you the advantage of being able to shoot slower shutter speeds and still get the shot, effectively making it a 'faster' lens than one without IS.

The build quality is good, similar to the Canon lenses I have been trying. I guess I would say try to get it new from a seller you can return it to if you don't like it.
 
My 50mm 1.4 prime spoiled me...2.8 just isn't fast enough for available light indoors unless your willing to bump ISO into 3200 land.
 
how's the focus throw compare? i've heard the tamron won't rotate nearly as far as the canon for full focus range. that would make things tough, especially with a follow focus. so would the bad breathing. but that price sure looks a lot better. i'm looking at these as well.
 
dust'n the callipygous said:
how's the focus throw compare? i've heard the tamron won't rotate nearly as far as the canon for full focus range. that would make things tough, especially with a follow focus. so would the bad breathing. but that price sure looks a lot better. i'm looking at these as well.
Click to expand...

I've played briefly with a friend's Canon 17-55 and found it annoying that the focus was the closest to the camera body (the zoom ring is at the end of the lens). I also found the focusing ring pretty thin. From what I understand of the stills on Tamron's site, their lens are setup the other way around (focus at the end) which is a advantage in my book.

-X
 
dust'n the callipygous said:
how's the focus throw compare? i've heard the tamron won't rotate nearly as far as the canon for full focus range. that would make things tough, especially with a follow focus. so would the bad breathing. but that price sure looks a lot better. i'm looking at these as well.
Click to expand...

again, I don't have a Canon lens of the same specs to compare, but on the Tamron I find the manual focus throw to be way too small and non-fluid to focus easily on the fly. It's possible, but not optimal. I feel the low end Canon's are similar, at least my included 28-135 IS is like that as well. Manual mode is kind of an afterthought, I think, with these less expensive IS lenses.

After shooting a bit with and without IS, I would definitely recommend an IS lens. The problem is that it seems the fastest IS lenses are f2.8, so if you want faster, and go to primes (I also have a couple of Nikon manual primes, f1.4 and f1.8 that I adapted to the Canon) you sacrifice IS.

I did a little test today with a nice Canon 70-200 f4 L lens. The images, even in video, were definitely better than the cheapo Canon 55-250 with IS. The problem: Even on a tripod, when zoomed fully in, the L lens was shaky, and the cheapo IS lens was smooth. I can't always have this system set up on a rock solid tripod with no wind, so any lens I get, that goes above 50mm is going to have to have IS. However you might need to get a L-class lens to get that velvety and easily tuned focus we have all gotten used to with our non-AF lenses.
 
xbourque said:
I've played briefly with a friend's Canon 17-55 and found it annoying that the focus was the closest to the camera body (the zoom ring is at the end of the lens). I also found the focusing ring pretty thin. From what I understand of the stills on Tamron's site, their lens are setup the other way around (focus at the end) which is a advantage in my book.

-X
Click to expand...

first off I played with a friends Tamaron 17 to 50mm...it was the one WITHOUT an Image Stabilizer.....whenever I racked focus there was insane "breathing" going on in the lens. It would be unusable for racking focus in video mode. Not sure if that carries over in the lens with image stabilization....

second...I wanted to know if anyone has tried a follow focus unit with the Canon 17 to 55mm IS USM lens....because that is a good question. In video mode I would want to be able to put a follow focus ring around it and if the focus ring is up against the body that might be difficult and not even doable.

Anyone have any input on this?

Ronster
 
Does the lens extend or rotate at all while focusing? I want to try it in an underwater EWA Marine housing!

Also I can't find this lens anywhere online and need it soon!
 
Thanks guys, anyone still has any info on this lens availability? eBay has some Japanese and Chinese sellers that charge $670 plus import duties on your own. Far too steep for the risk!
 
Ronster said:
second...I wanted to know if anyone has tried a follow focus unit with the Canon 17 to 55mm IS USM lens....because that is a good question. In video mode I would want to be able to put a follow focus ring around it and if the focus ring is up against the body that might be difficult and not even doable.

Anyone have any input on this?

Ronster
Click to expand...

Old thread, but I'm wondering this exact same thing. Anyone?

It seems like both the Tamron VC and the Canon IS have quirks regarding focusing. The Tamron VC's focus ring is apparently anything but smooth, and the Canon's focus ring is closer to the body.
 
Last edited:
Amazon always seems to have some. They even have open box specials in their Warehouse Deals section where you can save $100. I bought my two for around $550 doing it this way. Hope this helps!
 
I have it and love it. My only issue is the one I got from Amazon was dirty and they will only let me return it instead of exchanging and I don't want to do that because I will have to wait for them to refund the money and then it go back to my CC and then have to order again. So that could take over 2 weeks and I really can't afford to not have it. Plus, I got it cheap as hell on Amazon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top