Dec 4 2009, 03:14 PM
QUOTE(lighter @ Dec 4 2009, 01:13 AM)
Currently I'm using Tamron 17-50 VC so far no focusing problem even in low light compare to my old Tamron 18-270 VC. IQ wise very sharp except 50mm focal length obviously soft @ f/2.8 but no problem at f/3.5.
I can say Tamron 17-50mm VC is really worth the money. A lot of users saying that the VC is not necessary for 17-50mm focal length. My answer is NO, the VC is very useful even in wide focal length. I can shoot at 1 sec with handheld @ f/2.8. Can non-VC do that? I don't think so..
The VC activation is a bit slow compare to VR and OS. It takes about 0.3sec to activate the VC.
Good to know, I was looking at the 17-50 a while back too, but reading about the focusing issues put me off. Can't agree enough about the VC too. Having it on a f/2.8 allows you to handhold in even more crazy situations that you wouldn't even bother to try on a non-stabilised lens, and how can more options possibly be a bad thing?I can say Tamron 17-50mm VC is really worth the money. A lot of users saying that the VC is not necessary for 17-50mm focal length. My answer is NO, the VC is very useful even in wide focal length. I can shoot at 1 sec with handheld @ f/2.8. Can non-VC do that? I don't think so..
The VC activation is a bit slow compare to VR and OS. It takes about 0.3sec to activate the VC.
Sticking this in here because I can!
This post has been edited by foogray: Dec 4 2009, 03:23 PM
Quote
0.0220sec
0.62
7 queries
GZIP Disabled