Tamron 90mm - non VC vs VC

damianmkv

damianmkv

Uh oh, a fruit basket!
Messages
6,267
Edit My Images
Yes
I'd sold a few lenses this month and so am thinking about getting a Tamron for macro. I'd also like a longer prime so thats good :)

I don't have very steady hands and so am considering the VC version and the IF appeals too but this lens is a lot more money than the non-VC.

Does anyone have any experience of the VC version please ?
 
Hi Damian,

I have the VC version, it is very good indeed. All of my macro work has been done with it on and it hasn't failed me yet. I got mine through wex using topcashback to get some extra pennies off. No cheaper getting it from Hong Kong I found. You can look at my flickr if you don't fancy finding my posts.
 
Yes, I saw the likes of Panamoz / DR are the same as Amazon etc. The "real cost" to me ( over my recent sales ) would be £70..£400 just seems like a lot of money to me at the moment. My concern is that if I buy non VC, will my keeper rate be much lower as I'm a fussy sod

Will have a look at your Flickr later as no access during the day
 
Last edited:
damianmkv said:
Yes, I saw the likes of Panamoz / DR are the same as Amazon etc. The "real cost" to me ( over my recent sales ) would be £70..£400 just seems like a lot of money to me at the moment. My concern is that if I bu non VC, will my keeper rate be much lower as I'm a fussy sod

Will have a look at your Flickr later as no access during the day
Click to expand...

You stated that you don't have a steady hand and if this is truly correct I would highly recommend the VC as I still get some non keepers as not got the steadiest hand myself either.
 
not as steady as I'd like, Bryn, no - and not good enough for non VC macro really. I see quidco offer 2.5% back from Wex....

hmmm...
 
I had a try with the 90mm VC on my 600D at the weekend and have to agree with others that the VC stops things dead.......or so I thought. The problem I have is a pinched nerve in my upper back which results in a constant tremble in my left hand, I thought the VC would be good enough to compensate but sadly it didn't. The lens belongs to a friend who did a comparison test with my 600D, he used 3 extension tubes with the 50mm 1.8 on the end then just the tamron. The results were not too bad in his steady hands with the rings and 50mm but with the tamron they were a long way better. I was considering the tamron 90 VC v sigma 105 OS but after trying handheld......and failing I think I'll have to wait. The difference for the VC and non VC varies between £30-50 for the canon mount, so if I was buying I think that VC would be the way to go.
 
Last edited:
I have a 17-50vc so I know Tamron make a good lens - really pleased with it.

My shake is nothing as bad as yours, Barso, I'm just not as steady as I'd wish and notice the trembles more and more.

So if looks like the way to go - I just have to work out if the results I'd get compared with a raynox justify the outlay
 
Surely you would be using a tripod and manual focus for most macro work so no real need for the vc unless you plan using it more for general use.
 
StuartH said:
Surely you would be using a tripod and manual focus for most macro work so no real need for the vc unless you plan using it more for general use.
Click to expand...

This depends on the Macro work OP is planning on doing (from flickr it appears to be mainly bugs). Bugs for instance very hard to use a tripod set up as they are constantly on the move. However for Plants and creative macro certainly tripod is highly recommended.
 
damianmkv said:
I have a 17-50vc so I know Tamron make a good lens - really pleased with it.

My shake is nothing as bad as yours, Barso, I'm just not as steady as I'd wish and notice the trembles more and more.

So if looks like the way to go - I just have to work out if the results I'd get compared with a raynox justify the outlay
Click to expand...

If your not sure I would recommend you rent it and see if it can convince you but remember the raynox can be put on the end of it too, take you to an even further adventure down the macro route. Looking at your flickr macro work you seem very proficient with the raynox.
 
I don't use a tripod for macro, no. As Bryn says i mainly shoot bugs and the like - they tend to be either too low down, too high up or too skittish and so tripod useage isn't really an option.

I like the raynox, yes, its taken a while to get the best out of it.
 
I hear what your saying regarding skittish bugs etc but I got by using a tripod for exactly that type of shooting but yes agreed at times it can be a pain.Have you considered a longer focal length?..I used to use both the tamron 90mm and also the sigma 150mm which was cracking for bugs.
 
I've thought about it, yes. My dilemma is that I was thinking about using it as a portrait lens too - if I go too long on a crop body then I'll never be able to do that.

I've been really impressed with my Tamron so that's why I'm thinking of that lens
 
that's what I want - I think *most* macro lenses are sharp and I want to take the best I can but not with a blank cheque
 
+1 on the non vc. Amazing optics and for macro I only ever use MF
 
damianmkv said:
I'd sold a few lenses this month and so am thinking about getting a Tamron for macro. I'd also like a longer prime so thats good :)

I don't have very steady hands and so am considering the VC version and the IF appeals too but this lens is a lot more money than the non-VC.

Does anyone have any experience of the VC version please ?
Click to expand...

Have a look at the New Sigma 105mm f2.8 cracking lens and great for portraits too +_ the AF is quick enough although I always shot using manual focus for macro stuff

Here's the one I bought

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-sigma-105mm-f2-8-apo-macro-ex-dg-os-hsm-sony-fit/p1526838

Les ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thanks Les..will have a read to see if there's a "better" one between the 2
 
indeed - size is always important. Sometimes you can be too long though - i see the Sigma is about 200+ grams heavier too...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top