January 28, 2011 – Autumn in Vermont

Autumn in Vermont

Autumn in Vermont

Friday, January 28, 2011


Barely snuck this one in before the close of business on Friday. Whew. I spent some time over the past couple days going through some of the shots I got on a couple of the quick trips I got to go on last fall, one to New England (for a wedding) and one to Yosemite (was in SF for work). So, here’s one from New England. I think I’ve told the story before: we were only there for about a day and a half, and the weather started out marginal and became horrendous by the time we left. (Turns out a huge Nor’Easter blew through, dropping a bunch of snow and such. Lovely.) Saw enough stuff to convince me that I definitely need to go back some day, but didn’t really get too many great shots while I was there. Oh well, that’s how it goes sometimes.

I’m really not sure where I took this. We basically just drove around the whole time we were there. We stayed in Castleton, which is sort of in the central-west part of the state, and we ended up driving up to Burlington. So this was somewhere in that vicinity. We were there during the first or second weekend in October I think, so definitely past the peak of fall color for that area, but there was still plenty of color to be had. (Would have been great if the weather held out, grrr.) Although, at that time, the color was MUCH more intense further sound, specifically in southern and central New York, so the drive up there was FANTASTIC.

Have a great weekend!

Notes: Camera: Canon EOS Rebel T1i, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens. 1/250s, f/6.3, ISO 400. Focal length: 32mm.

Subscribe to the Picture of the Day via: a feed reader (RSS) or email


  1. avatar
    PhotoVigor January 29, 2011

    Love your shot. Love the tone.
    I am using Canon EOS 450D with 18-200 and now looking for EF-S 15-85. but it is expensive. So alternatively I am looking for Tamron 17-50 instead. Is Tamron 17-50 a really good lens? Thanks for your time. Cheers. :)

  2. avatar
    Dave January 31, 2011

    Thanks for the kind words!

    The question about the Tamron 17-50 is an interesting one. It can be a great lens. But you’re definitely making compromises. But, that’s to be expected, as it’s significantly less expensive than some other options, as you noticed.

    The biggest drawback is that it’s really loud when focusing. For some people, this is an issue, for me personally, it’s not. Also, the focus can be slow, and occasionally it can miss. I generally take a few shots if possible, just to be sure.

    The image quality is outstanding, extremely sharp. I’ve had really great luck with it.

    Note that I’ve got the NON-image stabilized version. The VC version (VC=Tamron’s image stabilization technology) is obviously a similar but different lens, so I can’t speak to the quality of that one.

    Also, I know nothing about the Canon 15-85, so I can’t compare the two. Although I *will* say that the f/2.8 on the Tamron is really nice, so I’d hesitate to go with the f/3.5-5.6 Canon, especially one that’s not an L-series.

    If you have an unlimited budget (yeah, wouldn’t that be nice?) an L-series lens is always a good choice. But for the rest of us, I’ve found that the Tamron is a great balance of price vs. quality.

  3. avatar
    PhotoVigor February 2, 2011

    Hi Dave,
    Thanks so much for your detail explanations. In fact I am posing same question but no one can explain like you did. I will take a closer look on it. Thanks so much. :)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *