Tamron AF28-300mm VC or no VC

clemensphoto's

I'm planning on purchasing some new glass in the next couple of weeks and I was wondering if the extra $200.00 was worth forking out for vibration control? I shot mostly sports (indoor and outdoor) and prefer to shoot without a monopod or tripod since I'm always on the move (trying different angles).

Could anyone please post photos that they have taken with the Tamron 28-300mm VC? I have noticed the photos that are shown on Tamron seem a little soft with the VC.

Thanks

dangin

the newer 28-300 is supposed to have better optics and less CA than the old one. i don't have the old one so i really can't comment however the new VC is a little on the soft side, IMO. it should be noted that i've had AF-locking issues with mine. i can't tell if it's my copy for sure or not. once wedding season is over i'll be sending it in for tamron techs to look into.

Tee Why

I think if you do a lot of indoor sports, having a faster prime may be better at freezing motion than a slower lens with a VC. Outdoors, if you have enough light should be good, but even there, a fast prime will give you a shallower dof, giving the subject better isolation.

clemensphoto's

Thanks for the input! After looking at all of the images provided by Tamron and your comments I think I'll just get the no VC glass.