Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

  1. #1

    Default Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

    I understand this is another one-of-those threads but trying to consolidate good information here for people with similar situations

    To start of, I've delisted 17-40L cos of range and 24-70L cos of weight/size

    Here are some facts of my cam/photograpy
    1. using 400D with 580EX
    2. have 18-55 Kit and 70-200 f/4L
    3. loves travelling and looking for a go-to lens
    4. prefers to be more lightweight since i will bring the 70-200 along too
    5. intending to get a good 35/50 prime if necessary
    6. loves to take potraits of people / pets
    7. not that kind who will go hunting down buildings/landscapes. shoot as i see.

    shoot me with your recommendations!

  2. #2

    Default Re: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

    canon 17-55. f2.8 + IS. 17mm is more useful than 24mm. IS and USM focusing are advantages over the tamron. one of the sharpest zooms currently available.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

    Thanx for the advice.

    Then the question is $680 vs $1800... Is it worth it? :P

  4. #4

    Default Re: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by planetg View Post
    Thanx for the advice.

    Then the question is $680 vs $1800... Is it worth it? :P
    Do u take lowlight portraits without Tripod or flash?
    If Yes, then it's worth it

  5. #5

    Default Re: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by planetg View Post
    Thanx for the advice.

    Then the question is $680 vs $1800... Is it worth it? :P
    Well, if you are considering the 24-105 f4 L, you should be asking the same question right? It is afterall 'only' f4...

    In your situation, I'd get a 3rd party 17/18-50/55, figure out which focal lenght I like (either 35mm or 50mm - which incidentally I love on the 1.6x crop), then get the prime.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by planetg View Post
    Thanx for the advice.

    Then the question is $680 vs $1800... Is it worth it? :P
    it's the only f2.8 wide to mid tele zoom with IS currently available. whether worth it or not is up to you but if you already have a 24-105 in consideration, you would have already prepared yourself to pay that much for a lens.
    Last edited by mephisto; 23rd March 2007 at 07:41 PM.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

    One prime doesn't seem to fulfill travel options.

    More than one prime doesn't seem to make sense as I'll have to change lens often?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frijj View Post
    Well, if you are considering the 24-105 f4 L, you should be asking the same question right? It is afterall 'only' f4...

    In your situation, I'd get a 3rd party 17/18-50/55, figure out which focal lenght I like (either 35mm or 50mm - which incidentally I love on the 1.6x crop), then get the prime.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4L or Canon 17-55 f/2.8

    yup. i also understand it's the only f/2.8 with IS for that focal range.

    guess i'll try to loan the 2 canons to compare and test

    if budget is an issue, then it's tamron.

    Quote Originally Posted by mephisto View Post
    it's the only f2.8 wide to mid tele zoom with IS currently available. whether worth it or not is up to you but if you already have a 24-105 in consideration, you would have already prepared yourself to pay that much for a lens.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •