Canon 18-55mm IS vs Tamron 17-50mm (non VC)

[night86mare]

I was using it
Yes the IQ is better (at least noticeable) then the kit lens. But again many people has mentioned this 18-55 is a good lens as well, for the $$ you paid.

Check the MTF, though direct comparison (i.e. 18 mm vs 18 mm, 35 mm vs 35 mm, etc) is not available from this website
Tamron: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/2...pherical-if-canon-test-report--review?start=1
EFS 18-55: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/181-canon-ef-s-18-55mm-f35-56-is-test-report--review?start=1

If you have the budget then just upgrade to the Tamron. If you don't have, keep using your kit lens at the moment.

did you read the links, based on mtf, both are almost on par, in my view.

 

[soons]

how to read the MTF? i do not understand from the link. What does the number means, the higher the better?

 

[Shen siung]

did you read the links, based on mtf, both are almost on par, in my view.

Yes i did read. As I mentioned, they did not compare 'side by side' i.e 24 mm vs 24 mm.
But from what I know, IQ of a lens is not solely rely on MTF. Other factors, thought could be minor, also contribute.

 

[night86mare]

Yes i did read. As I mentioned, they did not compare 'side by side' i.e 24 mm vs 24 mm.
But from what I know, IQ of a lens is not solely rely on MTF. Other factors, thought could be minor, also contribute.

well, yes, some people also dispute the use of mtf as a measurement.

things like distortion, CA, etc.. are also important. but these can be handled in post process, which is why my primary concern when comparing IQ from lens is generally just based on resolution, nothing more.

there are also other intangible factors such as build, feel, etc. cheers.

 

[takengo2003]

if i have few lens to choice, may i know which has the best IQ from the below list.

1) Tamron 17-50mm (non VC)
2) Canon 15-85mm IS
3) Canon 18-55mm IS

I know there is Canon 17-55mm F2.8, but that is too ex and prompt to zoom crep.
Hence only interested in the above 3.

can i safely say tamron is the best,follow by 15-85, then 18-55?

 

[bullseyez]

thanks, learn something today.

so do i. no wonder most of my indoor group photo shown some of my friend face is not clear. its cos of my setting mostly at f3.5(kit lens) or f1.8(prime)

am i correct?

 

[rocketatw]

just curious, any IQ difference for 18-55mm IS for Japan and Taiwan set? how about built quality?

 

[Keegan Ho]

Hi all,

I am currently having the same situation too. I am thinking about Canon 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM. Would it be a better choice as compared to Tamron 17-50mm in terms of IQ as it has additional IS?

Thanks in advance to all =)

 

[Michaelavaloke2009]

Hi all,

I am currently having the same situation too. I am thinking about Canon 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM. Would it be a better choice as compared to Tamron 17-50mm in terms of IQ as it has additional IS?

Thanks in advance to all =)

IMHO, Tammy is f2.8 which give you more lights at all length hence better IQ. Tammy glasses coating is better too as compare to the EFs17-85. Just my 2cents.

 

[LukaviZ]

to put it across simply, just get the tamron 17-50 non-vc, and start shooting.

the 18-55IS looks plastic, feels plastic, and the zoom ring turns 'chunkily', ie to say, it's not as smooth. what can i say. you pay a little more for quality. in the case of the 17-50, it's not that expensive as compared to what the canon 17-55IS would cost.

having fixed aperture, moreover at 2.8, gives you alot more freedom and control over the 18-55.

F2.8 vs F4 = 1 stop. that's the difference between shutter speeds of 1/50 and 1/100. if it's F5.6, it's even slower, giving you 1/25 shutter speeds. it does make a difference indoors especially. shooting with the 18-55 kitlens indoors has always been a pain; you'd either have to kick up ISO, or compulsory to use flash.

 

[Keegan Ho]

hey!

Thanks so much to both of you for your insightful advice. I forgot to add that I actually do own a 50mm f1.8 as well. So does that still justify my choice if i choose the tamron 17-50 instead of canon 17-85? Is the IS function of canon not that important?

Thanks once again.

 

[afzp25]

to put it across simply, just get the tamron 17-50 non-vc, and start shooting.

the 18-55IS looks plastic, feels plastic, and the zoom ring turns 'chunkily', ie to say, it's not as smooth. what can i say. you pay a little more for quality. in the case of the 17-50, it's not that expensive as compared to what the canon 17-55IS would cost.

having fixed aperture, moreover at 2.8, gives you alot more freedom and control over the 18-55.

F2.8 vs F4 = 1 stop. that's the difference between shutter speeds of 1/50 and 1/100. if it's F5.6, it's even slower, giving you 1/25 shutter speeds. it does make a difference indoors especially. shooting with the 18-55 kitlens indoors has always been a pain; you'd either have to kick up ISO, or compulsory to use flash.

Hi

1) Tamron 17-50mm (non VC) - Does NON VC means image stabiliser or equivalent
2)is the above mentioned plasticky 18-55IS the kit lens

I am strongly considering to buy the 550d.Since many have give high reviews about the tamron 17~50 (non vc) , i feel like getting it.

My other option is Pentax k-7.Is there a similiar lens for that cam?

 

[shaw shank]

using 2.8, wifout IS shld not be an issue as it is a fast lens compared to 5.6 etc....
for me, i am using 28-75 f2.8 non VC/IS, so far have been good....

just sharing...

 

[auden09]

haha i am finding myself in a dilemma now...17-40L vs tammy 17-50. my friend got it today on his nikon and the IQ is pretty good. the colors,contrast and sharpness come out pretty good. gee...what u guys think?

 

[Cartman2000]

haha i am finding myself in a dilemma now...17-40L vs tammy 17-50. my friend got it today on his nikon and the IQ is pretty good. the colors,contrast and sharpness come out pretty good. gee...what u guys think?

No need think so much, if you think it's good and you want/need it, just get it.

 

[engrmariano]

haha i am finding myself in a dilemma now...17-40L vs tammy 17-50. my friend got it today on his nikon and the IQ is pretty good. the colors,contrast and sharpness come out pretty good. gee...what u guys think?

choosing between these two lenses shouldnt be a dilemma. 17-40L is intended as UWA zoom for FF and T17-50 is intended as normal zoom for aps-c.

 

[tyho]

For me thinking back to what I was thinking when I built up my lens collection I think the choice to upgrade to the Tamron 17-50/f2.8 was clearer as I my kit lens was the 18-55 non IS (known to be inferior to the newer IS version).

There is a clear difference between my lenses.

Even after I built up my used lens collection with a 24-105L and an 18-200IS (for traveling) and a EF35/f2, I still use the Tamron 17-50 quite regularly. I've shot at different f stops and still get consistently sharp pictures (unless I shake the the cam too much).

If you do a lot of indoor shooting I think the Tamron is a good buy. I know your kit lens is pretty good so I would decide 1st: do I need other focal lengths? Will I be shooting only at the 17-55 range? If other focal lengths not covered, I would vote to get those lenses 1st since the kit lens is already pretty good. eg an ultrawide 10-22 or similar, or a zoom eg 55-250IS.
If don't need other focal lengths I believe the Tamron is a justifiable upgrade. Note that on some bodies it will not AF as well as Canon's own lenses. It hunted frequently on my 300D but is fine on my 40D (using only the centre AF spot).

 

[2evans]

haha i am finding myself in a dilemma now...17-40L vs tammy 17-50. my friend got it today on his nikon and the IQ is pretty good. the colors,contrast and sharpness come out pretty good. gee...what u guys think?

From your sig, you already have the 17-40L?