Lens recommendation

[little elvis]

I'm trying to decide on a lens for my Canon Rebel XTi, and I've narrowed it down to either the Canon 17-85mm IS or Tamron 17-50/2.8. Really having a hard time deciding between the two.

I like the greater zoom range of the Canon, and the IS feature, but not too thrilled with the "slowness" of the lens

I haven't had really much experience with the Tamron as a brand, and I am little concerned with the lenses overall quality.

As for usage, the majority of shots I'll be taking are likely going to be landscape type shots.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[kalster]

tamron 17-50 by far, its a great lens

 

[OdiN]

Yeah the Tamron is a good lens. For a comparable Canon lens, you would get an EF-S 17-55 IS.

I have owned the 17-85IS. It is not a bad lens.

If you're taking landscape shots - then it should be just fine at it. You don't need f/2.8 for landscapes. Most of the time you're going to be around f/5.6, f/8 or more depending on the shot for landscapes. So I don't think the fact that the 17-85 IS isn't 2.8 should affect your decision.

http://picsorban.com/upload/dv.jpg

That was shot with the Canon 17-85 IS. I can't find my other one which was from the same shoot but tons better, as I'm at work at the moment.

I even shot some pics at an indoor wedding with the 17-85 IS and they turned out fine.

 

[rudder]

As an owner of the Tamron 17-50... I an attest to the sharpness of the lens even at f/2.8. Tee only thing I do not like about this lens is the incredibly loud (not jet engine loud... but for a lens its loud) autofocus motor.

Don't worry about the Tamron quality. They are plastic just like the Canons... and I have never heard anyone be dissapointed with them.

 

[Jawo]

Originally posted by: rudder
As an owner of the Tamron 17-50... I an attest to the sharpness of the lens even at f/2.8. Tee only thing I do not like about this lens is the incredibly loud (not jet engine loud... but for a lens its loud) autofocus motor.

Don't worry about the Tamron quality. They are plastic just like the Canons... and I have never heard anyone be dissapointed with them.

I would agree as another Tamron 17-50 owner. Its a great general purpose lens for those on a budget. The biggest gripe I have is the zoom turns the same way as you have when unmounting the lens...its a minor annoyance...

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: Jawo

Originally posted by: rudder
As an owner of the Tamron 17-50... I an attest to the sharpness of the lens even at f/2.8. Tee only thing I do not like about this lens is the incredibly loud (not jet engine loud... but for a lens its loud) autofocus motor.

Don't worry about the Tamron quality. They are plastic just like the Canons... and I have never heard anyone be dissapointed with them.

I would agree as another Tamron 17-50 owner. Its a great general purpose lens for those on a budget. The biggest gripe I have is the zoom turns the same way as you have when unmounting the lens...its a minor annoyance...

The zoom turns both ways.

I think you mean that zooming in vs. zooming out is opposite to the way Canon lenses are. Canon copyrighted it so that other lenses had to be backwards and thus feel "wrong".

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Jawo

Originally posted by: rudder
As an owner of the Tamron 17-50... I an attest to the sharpness of the lens even at f/2.8. Tee only thing I do not like about this lens is the incredibly loud (not jet engine loud... but for a lens its loud) autofocus motor.

Don't worry about the Tamron quality. They are plastic just like the Canons... and I have never heard anyone be dissapointed with them.

I would agree as another Tamron 17-50 owner. Its a great general purpose lens for those on a budget. The biggest gripe I have is the zoom turns the same way as you have when unmounting the lens...its a minor annoyance...

The zoom turns both ways.

I think you mean that zooming in vs. zooming out is opposite to the way Canon lenses are. Canon copyrighted it so that other lenses had to be backwards and thus feel "wrong".

Really? I didn't know canon did that with the zooming. Doesn't sigma turn the same way?

Also, I wish sigma or tamron would update these lenses with a better autofocus model. I've been considering hte sigma 24-60/70 but I can't decide. 2.8 for low-light is useless if AF doesn't work too well.

EDIT: Not bashing on these lenses, but I wish they'd focus like the canon 17-40. I like that lens, but its just not quick enough and I can't afford the costly 17-55is.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Jawo

Originally posted by: rudder
As an owner of the Tamron 17-50... I an attest to the sharpness of the lens even at f/2.8. Tee only thing I do not like about this lens is the incredibly loud (not jet engine loud... but for a lens its loud) autofocus motor.

Don't worry about the Tamron quality. They are plastic just like the Canons... and I have never heard anyone be dissapointed with them.

I would agree as another Tamron 17-50 owner. Its a great general purpose lens for those on a budget. The biggest gripe I have is the zoom turns the same way as you have when unmounting the lens...its a minor annoyance...

The zoom turns both ways.

I think you mean that zooming in vs. zooming out is opposite to the way Canon lenses are. Canon copyrighted it so that other lenses had to be backwards and thus feel "wrong".

Really? I didn't know canon did that with the zooming. Doesn't sigma turn the same way?

Also, I wish sigma or tamron would update these lenses with a better autofocus model. I've been considering hte sigma 24-60/70 but I can't decide. 2.8 for low-light is useless if AF doesn't work too well.

EDIT: Not bashing on these lenses, but I wish they'd focus like the canon 17-40. I like that lens, but its just not quick enough and I can't afford the costly 17-55is.

Every 3rd party Canon lens I've used turns opposite of Canon lenses.

I'm not sure which way Nikon does it, but it wouldn't surprise me if their 3rd party lenses have the same "issue".

It's just Canon protecting their brand. When you get used to turning one way to zoom, you don't think about it when using another lens. This is one reason I don't own and 3rd party lenses. When I'm doing weddings, often it's just grab and zoom in while bringing the camera up - you don't always think about the lens.

Sigma does have lenses which rotate the same way Canon lenses do, but I believe they are for other cameras. All lenses that work for Canon are opposite AFAIK.


EDIT:

I did find a few Sigmas which rotate the same way as Canon lenses. They are digital lenses made for the EF-S mount, so that may have something to do with it. Maybe Canon doesn't posess the same rights for that mount - or it's also possible that Sigma licensed them to do that through Canon (they are newer lenses).

 

[corkyg]

I find this direction of focus twist amusing. I used Tamron and Sigma lenses with my D60 and 20D before I could afford Canon. They were excellent. Then when I got Canon lenses, I was annoyed because THEY turned the wrong way.

 

[Jawo]

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Jawo

Originally posted by: rudder
As an owner of the Tamron 17-50... I an attest to the sharpness of the lens even at f/2.8. Tee only thing I do not like about this lens is the incredibly loud (not jet engine loud... but for a lens its loud) autofocus motor.

Don't worry about the Tamron quality. They are plastic just like the Canons... and I have never heard anyone be dissapointed with them.

I would agree as another Tamron 17-50 owner. Its a great general purpose lens for those on a budget. The biggest gripe I have is the zoom turns the same way as you have when unmounting the lens...its a minor annoyance...

The zoom turns both ways.

I think you mean that zooming in vs. zooming out is opposite to the way Canon lenses are. Canon copyrighted it so that other lenses had to be backwards and thus feel "wrong".

Yes, that's what I meant. I didn't realize that Canon had a patent on which way the lens' zoom rotates. Its not a big problem, just an annoyance when I go from my Tamron 17-50 to my Canon 70-300 IS USM.

 

[Shimmishim]

Originally posted by: Jawo

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Jawo

Originally posted by: rudder
As an owner of the Tamron 17-50... I an attest to the sharpness of the lens even at f/2.8. Tee only thing I do not like about this lens is the incredibly loud (not jet engine loud... but for a lens its loud) autofocus motor.

Don't worry about the Tamron quality. They are plastic just like the Canons... and I have never heard anyone be dissapointed with them.

I would agree as another Tamron 17-50 owner. Its a great general purpose lens for those on a budget. The biggest gripe I have is the zoom turns the same way as you have when unmounting the lens...its a minor annoyance...

The zoom turns both ways.

I think you mean that zooming in vs. zooming out is opposite to the way Canon lenses are. Canon copyrighted it so that other lenses had to be backwards and thus feel "wrong".

Yes, that's what I meant. I didn't realize that Canon had a patent on which way the lens' zoom rotates. Its not a big problem, just an annoyance when I go from my Tamron 17-50 to my Canon 70-300 IS USM.

Yes I was confused too when I got my first Canon lens since I owned the 17-50 as my first lens... was wondering why the zoom mechanism was reverse of what I was used to.

Oh well... not a big deal anymore

and I will have to give another vote for the 17-50. It's a sweet lens but like others said the focus mechanism is quite loud compared to my canon USM lenses... but that should be a given!

 

[little elvis]

Well, I decided to go with the Tamron 17-50 and from the test shots I took, I think I made the right choice.

Thanks!

 

[ElFenix]

canon focuses with infinity to the right, which is the way leica does it, so obviously it can't be a canon patent. nikon focuses with infinity on the left, probably just to be contrary to leica.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Between the two, the Tamron 17-50.

But why not consider the new Canon 18-55 IS:

Lens costs $175 at B&H.

 

[ucdbiendog]

so, if you can patent a "zoom-in" direction, why didn't they patent both directions? then they could collect additional licensing form 3rd parties...

 

[spikespiegal]

I also have the Tammy and am a fanatic when it comes to lens sharpness. My other two main lenses are a 50mm 1.4 and Canon 100 2.8 Macro, and the Tammy can keep up with either (at the long end). At F4 / 50mm the Tamron might actually be a hair sharper than my Canon 50mm 1.4. Tests on Photzone confirm it.

However, what I don't like about the Tamron is I find myself wishing I had more focal length for candids and less at the wide end. I'm not a wide shooter by nature, and I've yet to use *any* APS based wide-zoom that performs decent at the wide end.

 

[Brainonska511]

I have 2 Tamron lens that I think are great. The 17-35 f/2.8-4 and the 28-75 f/2.8 DI lenses are both great on my XT. It was also great, because to get equivalent Canon lenses, I would have had to drop a boat load more money.