Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Canon or Tamron....

  1. #1

    Default Canon or Tamron....

    Dear Pros..

    Which is a better lens ?

    Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP or Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM ?

    Thx ... .

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    17-50 for me anytime unless you plan to upgrade to FF or use with film cam... alternative would be Canon 17-55 IS

  3. #3

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    i'm using a 30D now with crap kit lens ... so tamron will b a better choice for me ?

  4. #4

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    whichever suits your needs.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    i have tried the 17-40 with the 17-50.

    The canon one is better in all areas.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    A village in a forest
    Posts
    1,515

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    Get the Tamron if you need a shallower DOF, or need faster shutter speed for lowlightings, or on a tighter budget. Get the Canon if you are looking for built, slightly better image quality, faster focusing and the L branding.
    Canon 80D|Panasonic LX3/LX5
    35f2 IS|50f1.8|85f1.8|12-24f4|18-135f4-5.6 IS|28-75f2.8

  7. #7

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    Is a travelling lens , mostly for land / city scapes , abstracts and still lifes .. . wat u reckon ?

  8. #8

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    sigma 18-200.

  9. #9
    Member tony_teo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Tanah Merah
    Posts
    276

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    Can also consider the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.

  10. #10
    Moderator diver-hloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere North
    Posts
    5,201

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    Better if you could tell us your Buget.....

    Canon EF 17-40mm L or EF-S 17-55mm both cost $1+K..... While the Tamron 17-50mm will be more than $600+.

    How much are you willing to spent 1st ??
    Last edited by diver-hloc; 10th December 2007 at 05:08 PM.

    Scuba & Father... For Life

  11. #11

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    bout $750~$900.
    thx .

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    Quote Originally Posted by twin fins View Post
    bout $750~$900.
    thx .
    That price can fetch u a 2nd-hand 17-40.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoweagle View Post
    That price can fetch u a 2nd-hand 17-40.


    A USED Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM is still better than a NEW Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP ?

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pasir Ris, Singapore
    Posts
    14,002

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    Quote Originally Posted by twin fins View Post
    A USED Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM is still better than a NEW Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP ?
    Not necessary, depending on how the previous owner uses it. If the overall condition's gd then it's definitely better. Else i would sugest u save more and get a new 17-40, now around $1100 only.

    Just to state an example, one of my friend bought a 2nd-hand older 17-35 f/2.8 and its zoom ring is very loose. That means it's heavily used but it doesn't matter to him. So the bottomline is, a used original lens doesn't mean is still better than a 3rd-party one of similar class.
    Canon EOS 5D, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 50 f/1.2 L, 70-300 f/4-5.6 L IS, 600EX-RT. Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 EX.

  15. #15
    Moderator diver-hloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere North
    Posts
    5,201

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    Quote Originally Posted by twin fins View Post
    A USED Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM is still better than a NEW Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP ?
    L lense are best in quality & build.... and for most here planning to go for a full frame camera later, a more worthwhile choices, but I would prefer the Tamron for its f2.8.....

    Scuba & Father... For Life

  16. #16
    Senior Member xunjas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Singapura
    Posts
    6,490

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    canon 17-40mm for me~~ gd gd lens~~ gd build, gd image quality, good for landscapes and portraits on a cropped sensor. on FF sensor, it makes a gd wide angle lens~~ =)

  17. #17

    Default Re: Canon or Tamron....

    I would go for the 2nd hand Canon L 17-40 because of it's track record, build quality, greater re-sale value and the bottom line factor: top-notch repair and after-sales service for it unlike ehem, some brands where all you get is some crap excuse and everything also have to 'send back to Japan, have to send back to Germany bla bla bla'.

    If you need more reach, flip freak suggested a Sigma 18-200 but the wide end suffers a bit, something that may bug you to no end for travel applications like landscapes and especially architecture.

    Actually, coming to think about it, 17mm is also no great shakes - it equates a FOV of a 28mm lens on a full frame when used on your 30D, so it a little wide, but not that wide. Personally, I would find 17mm too restrictive, but that's just me.

    Or you could get adventerous and go with a Sigma 10-20mm and a cheap 50mm prime (or a top-notch, super affordable, premium quality manual focus 50mm prime). Not a bad idea as it might force you to see things a lot more creatively.

    A lot of these things depend on your personal vision and ways of approaching a given subject.

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
  •