Ok let me muddy the water on this a little...I was at Best Buy picking up a DVD and they had a Tamron 17-55mm f/2.8 for $325 on clearance after my RZ Coupon. It is brand new. Would this be a better buy than the 17-40L?
Ok let me muddy the water on this a little...I was at Best Buy picking up a DVD and they had a Tamron 17-55mm f/2.8 for $325 on clearance after my RZ Coupon. It is brand new. Would this be a better buy than the 17-40L?
I don't think there is such a thing as a Tamron 17-55. It's 17-50, I believe.
the Tamron is a great lens, if you don't mind slower (and not-silent) AF. i would choose it over the 17-40 - faster (if you need speed), better focal length range, slightly sharper (particularly on the long end), and cheaper.
The Tamron 17-50 is generally well regarded. The only real trouble spots are quality control and construction...
Sure it is -- it gives you the equivalent angle of view of a 28mm lens on 135 format -- that' s a very workable wide-angle option.
When you get to 21mm and wider, as was suggested, is the realm of ultra-wide -- much more of a speciality lens... not a bad thing, mind you, but not as robust as the 28-65mm he'll get with this lens on a crop-body.
Also a nice future-proof lens -- upgrade to a 5D or the like and you now have an ultra-wide to (very slightly) wide-normal lens.