Tamron 17-50 VC Lens for wedding or portraits?

<p>I was wondering if anyone is or has actually used the Tamron 17-50 VC lens for wedding or portrait work? I've read the reviews but they are usually from "enthusiasts". I would like to know if any professionals have used it and what they think. Thanks for your help.<br>

Rick</p>

<p>Do a search in David Wegwart's posts for his comments on the lens. Here is one.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00V2Eh">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00V2Eh</a></p>

<p>If I had to do it all over again, I'd give that lens a try.<br>

Right now I'm using the Canon 17-55 IS. It's ok but there's just too much distortion at 17-20mm if you're not paying attention to the edges of your frame. And on a crop sensor, you really need that wide end in tight rooms.<br>

Not sure if it's any different for the Tamron but that one is a lot cheaper.</p>

<p> I have a few buddies using it for weddings. They are quite happy with it.</p>

<p>Russ</p>

<p>Hi Rick,</p>

<p>I have been using the D3+24-70/2.8 for my staple work. However, I recently got the D300s' for the dual cards and with those, I began using my trusty Tokina 16-50/2.8's again, for that range. When the Vc Tammy came along, I got one right away. It was awful. Front/back focusing terribly. I sent it back to B&H (great place to buy), and while going through the return info on the phone with the staff, the person asked if I wanted to exchange it. I said not it seem systemic rather than copy specific. That was due to my past experience with third party glass either working well with a particular body, or not. He told me a few others had complained (not many), and he sent them replacements they were very pleased with. I said, ok lets try it. </p>

<p>So, here I am with my new toy. Light, fairly quick to AF, accurate as much as any of my Nikon glass, sharp as the 17-55 in the center and most of the frame right from F2.8. I am happy as a clam with this lens and am currently using it about 50% of the time I shoot.</p>

<p>Here's a shot from a recent E-session with it...</p><div></div>

<p>That was at F7.1 and here's one into the rising sun at F11. F16 and smaller apertures seem not as good...</p><div></div>

<p>This is from a late Jan wedding: Usual poorly lit dressing room, F3.5; 1/50th; iso 3200; 35mm (equiv.); D300s.</p><div></div>

<p>David,</p>

<p>What type of lens hood was used for the "into the sun" shot?</p>

<p>The petal one that came with it.</p>

<p>We use a Tamron 17-50 on our D300. It's not the VC version. For this past weekend, we needed another copy, so we rented the VC version. We're pleased with both lenses, but for me, having VC was nice. I shot with it for probably 80% of the wedding day and don't have any complaints.</p>

<p>If you go to the technical test sites like photozone.de and dpreview.com you may find that the so-called pro lenses are not dramatically better than the current generation kit lenses. <br>

Paying 5 times more does not get you a 5 times better lens. <br>

Both Canon and Nikon have remembered the past, when the kit lens was a very sharp 50mm f1.8.</p>

<p>Thanks for all of your responses. It sounds like that everyone is quite happy with it.</p>