This retrospective study evaluated five VLMs (Qwen2.5, Phi-4, Gemma3, Llama3.2, and Mistral3.1) using the MedFMC dataset. This dataset includes 22,349 images from 7,461 patients encompassing chest radiography (19 disease multi-label classifications), colon pathology (tumor detection), endoscopy (colorectal lesion identification), neonatal jaundice assessment (skin color-based treatment necessity), and retinal fundoscopy (5-point diabetic retinopathy grading). Diagnostic accuracy was compared in three experimental settings: visual input only, multimodal input, and chain-of-thought reasoning. Model accuracy was assessed against ground truth labels, with statistical comparisons using bootstrapped confidence intervals (p<.05). Qwen2.5 achieved the highest accuracy for chest radiographs (90.4%) and endoscopy images (84.2%), significantly outperforming the other models (p<.001). In colon pathology, Qwen2.5 (69.0%) and Phi-4 (69.6%) performed comparably (p=.41), both significantly exceeding other VLMs (p<.001). Similarly, for neonatal jaundice assessment, Qwen2.5 (58.3%) and Phi-4 (58.1%) showed comparable leading accuracies (p=.93) significantly exceeding their counterparts (p<.001). All models struggled with retinal fundoscopy; Qwen2.5 and Gemma3 achieved the highest, albeit modest, accuracies at 18.6% (comparable, p=.99), significantly better than other tested models (p<.001). Unexpectedly, multimodal input reduced accuracy for some models and modalities, and chain-of-thought reasoning prompts also failed to improve accuracy. The open-source VLMs demonstrated promising diagnostic capabilities, particularly in chest radiograph interpretation. However, performance in complex domains such as retinal fundoscopy was limited, underscoring the need for further development and domain-specific adaptation before widespread clinical application.