Best walk around lens for Canon cropped body

[GlenWXQ]

cant decide whether to change my tamron 17-50 non vc to the 17-40L, i usually usually shoot candid shots, street photography and events occasionally, with the tamron although the IQ is super sharp when stopped down to f4, i cant trust the AF system completely, esp in low light conditions. Not sure whether is my body (50d) or that AF servo is also rather slow to respond to changes.

after reading all the reviews about the 17-40 im even more confused lol, im deducing that the contrast is higher and AF slightly faster and responsive and better build quality but with a tradeoff of 1 stop of light and a bit of IQ and 10mm range. Of course the fact that i would have to spend about $300 more to upgrade to the 17-40.

I know many people recommend the 17-55 over the 17-40 for crop sensors but as of now its kind of out of budget for me, maybe next time

Any suggestions guys? main concern i have for both lenses is the slow n not that reliable conventional AF of the tamron vs the IQ and 1 less stop of light of the canon

 

[rhema83]

cant decide whether to change my tamron 17-50 non vc to the 17-40L, i usually usually shoot candid shots, street photography and events occasionally, with the tamron although the IQ is super sharp when stopped down to f4, i cant trust the AF system completely, esp in low light conditions. Not sure whether is my body (50d) or that AF servo is also rather slow to respond to changes.

after reading all the reviews about the 17-40 im even more confused lol, im deducing that the contrast is higher and AF slightly faster and responsive and better build quality but with a tradeoff of 1 stop of light and a bit of IQ and 10mm range. Of course the fact that i would have to spend about $300 more to upgrade to the 17-40.

I know many people recommend the 17-55 over the 17-40 for crop sensors but as of now its kind of out of budget for me, maybe next time

Any suggestions guys? main concern i have for both lenses is the slow n not that reliable conventional AF of the tamron vs the IQ and 1 less stop of light of the canon

If you have the budget for a 17-40L, you might as well save up for a few more months for the 17-55. No point settling for something because your current budget doesn't allow it. You will still yearn to upgrade to the 17-55 later on. The Tamron 17-50 non-VC is pretty good and I don't think it is worth spending $300 to get the not-so-stellar 17-40L.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Blur Shadow]

I'd start of by saying that I use the Tamron 17-50mm since my Nikon D70 days and handled the 17-40mm f/4 before while using Canon full frame cameras (mainly 5D Mk II)

Well, let's just say that I prefer the Tamron over the Canon.

I think the image quality of the Canon 17-40mm f/4 isn't that stellar for its price, and I think the f/2.8 is far more useful for depth of field play.

I can't comment on your AF issues as I don't have the problem.

If you're looking to upgrade the Tamron, I'd consider either the Sigma 17-50mm OS or the Canon 17-55mm IS.

 

[GlenWXQ]

yeah... might just go with the 17-55, the only few things that bug me is that im paying a price even higher than some L lenses (70-200 f4, 17-40L, around the same as 135 f2) and i still get a plastic construction and not *uniform* zoom ring stiffness (if you know what i mean, like the 18-200). Worse still, no hood??? even my cheap sigma 70-300 at around $300 bucks came with one.

guess ill just have to suck it up lol... cant complain much also because the nikon version costs 1.5x the canon and dosnt even have VR, although better build quality though

 

[engrmariano]

no 85L??? :dunno:

 

[avsquare]

no 85L??? :dunno:

85L on a crop body = 127.5mm to 136mm?

too tight for a general walk-around lens :embrass:


BTW TS, I used to own the Tamron 17-50 and have no issues with the AF issue. IQ is good, and if you really want to upgrade, get the Canon 17-55. Damn expensive indeed, but I think it's worth it.

 

[rvf79]

If u like 17-40 on crop due to red ring then get 24-70

 

[GlenWXQ]

might go with the sigma 17-50 instead, around same price as 17-40L, but with OS and f2.8, supposedly even sharper than 17-55 at centre, although corner sharpness esp on wider ends are quite weak .... hmm anyone with the sigma relate that to real life scenarios? does the rather mediocre edge sharpness actually bother you? for me im thinking ill be shooting at least F4 at such a wide FL less im in a despo dark situation and by then its the OS capabilities that really matters more

 

[tecnica]

sigma user say sigma good, canon user say canon good.

just go with what you think is better and be happy with it.

imo, both are good for the price you are paying.

the differences are very minute and not discernible under real-time usage, unless you do very very large prints.

 

[Halfmoon]

sigma user say sigma good, canon user say canon good.

just go with what you think is better and be happy with it.

imo, both are good for the price you are paying.

the differences are very minute and not discernible under real-time usage, unless you do very very large prints.

Buy Sigma or Canon, TS have to do your own homework, and don't regret later........

One way is not to compare and be happy shooting.......

 

[Sam-Gor]

For the last time, I am not using this thread to ask people to do homework for me. I ALREADY got my Sigma 17-50 OS.

Buy Sigma or Canon, TS have to do your own homework, and don't regret later........

One way is not to compare and be happy shooting.......

 

[Halfmoon]

For the last time, I am not using this thread to ask people to do homework for me. I ALREADY got my Sigma 17-50 OS.

I am not implying you did not do you homework..........

What I meant was whatever you buy, dun regret about your decision and have fun shooting..............

 

[Sam-Gor]

I dont see why i have to do my homework when I already got my own lens. The poll is created just to see what kind of lens others are using.

 

[Halfmoon]

I dont see why i have to do my homework when I already got my own lens. The poll is created just to see what kind of lens others are using.

Whatever.... I meant whoever buy a lens have to do homework before buying, and when you have it, that's it, and go shooting.... Have you ever heard of "Buyer's remorse", or Post Purchase Cognitive Dissonance???? Buyer's remorse - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some people do suffer from that.... and my comment was a general comment, and not directed to anyone...

Anyway, just enjoy shooting with your new lens....

 

[maldito]

where's sigma 30mm f1.4

 

[engrmariano]

no 85L??? :dunno:

85L on a crop body = 127.5mm to 136mm?

too tight for a general walk-around lens :embrass:

well, it's not "too tight" for me as a walk around lens... and besides, it's a poll. no right or wrong choice, just personal preference...

 

[Calvincew]

24-105mm L for me
The only standard zoom lens I have haha

 

[getzreal]

Tried on the Tamron 17-50 VC and Canon 17-55 today. Canon 17-55 blew me off on the sharpness. Though the price is steep, I would reckon painstakingly go for Canon. Gotta to save up for few months for it. Cheers!

 

[tecnica]

Tried on the Tamron 17-50 VC and Canon 17-55 today. Canon 17-55 blew me off on the sharpness. Though the price is steep, I would reckon painstakingly go for Canon. Gotta to save up for few months for it. Cheers!

the king of crop does not get its title for nothing~

 

[blurboiboi]

Tried on the Tamron 17-50 VC and Canon 17-55 today. Canon 17-55 blew me off on the sharpness. Though the price is steep, I would reckon painstakingly go for Canon. Gotta to save up for few months for it. Cheers!

does it differ by alot??...