Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Wonder if anyone has opinions about these two lenses, I was ready to buy canon 17-55IS but today noticed canon 17-50 has pretty good reviews so I started debating.

From my personal point of view (and reading reviews):

Canon: a bit more range, USM, better focusing but seems to be prone to dust, may have a very slight edge in image quality.

Tamron: smaller (my preference), cheaper, reviews are quite good regarding image quality, can be mounted on film cameras (with vignetting though), keep reading it has 6 years warranty (will double check).

Both have image stabilizer.

I am torn, I guess I will decide at the store what may work better for me, any opinions appreciated.

Thank you.

Canon's 17-55 is basically L optics without the L badge, aspherical elements and coated etc etc.

Tamron is great however the big thing for me but maybe not you is the IS/VC sucks for video usage. Its unusable.

For photos, its a very capable lens and why not save a few hundred so you can buy something else too!

I heard the image stabilization doesn't work very well on the Tamron .. take a bit of time to kick in but I don't have any personal experience with it. If image stabilization is not a necessity for you I would consider the non VC version which is cheaper and has good reviews.

The Canon 17-55 'may' have L optics but definitely not L build quality. Personally I think it's way overpriced and I heard the resale market for these is not very good - probably because because it only works on crop bodies.

i've used the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 on my A300 before and it's worth it.

The 17-55is from Canon is a fantastic lens, one of the best I've ever owned. It didn't have a spec of dust in it, and the IS system didn't fail. You will hear others claim that they all get dust inside, and the IS fails on all of them. That clearly wasn't the case with the copy I had.

I only sold it when I went to a body that would only accept EF lenses, and I made money on it from buying it used and re-selling it a few months later.

If your budget is a concern than the Tamron is a great choice. I've read nothing but good things about that lens, at the price. I suggest that if budget is not a factor, you spring for the Canon.

I have used both of these lenses and the 17-55 IS is an outstanding super versatile fast lens. I have had no dust in it. Apparently once you put a front filter it drastically reduces dust going in. I've used this lens for over a year on a crop body and the IS was very reliable.

I only sold it when I picked up a 5D2. If I was dedicated using a 1.6x body, I would get this lens again over the Tamron without any doubts.

I have a Canon 17-55 IS and loving it since day 1.I have tried the Tamron 17-55 non IS one from a friend before I got my own Canon. The Canon one gave me a "wow" impression right away (just my personal preference). Enjoy

Thank you very much for the replies, I suspected the opinions are divided

I rarely use video so this is not a concern.

Resale value of 17-55IS is actually very good, new at B&H is 1100 (before taxes) and they go used on ebay for 850-950 range.

I will just have to go to the store and get a feel for both of them

Depending on your use the USM motor of the Canon might be important as they are pretty much silent. I don't believe Tamron has their own version of USM and from youtube it seems like the regular motors they use can be a bit buzzy. I guess that the shutter click is pretty loud as well though

Yes, this is one of the things I will have to look into and see for myself how much louder it is. I don't care for mirror slap and shutter click either, if this is louder than the lens than Tamron may not be a problem ?

I have used the canon 17-55 for 2 years and have also used the tamron 17-50 (non-vc version) for a few months. The tamron is noticeably nosier and slower in locking in focus. Color, contrast and sharpness are about the same for both.

I have used the Tamron non VC on a friend's camera, the focusing was quick and did a very good job shooting a group of 20.

Though I am biased and will likely purchase the 17-55 for the IS and better glass. with regards to warranties, you can always purchase additional, which I always do. I'm sure that helps more with resale too.

I am using the Tamron 17-50 non VC version for the past 5 years and given its price point, it is worth every penny. The AF is a bit noise but that doesnt come in the way of getting your shot. For half the price, you dont get half the photo.

A sample:

I'm currently using it. It's definitely an improvement over my last lens, Tamron 18-200mm.

The AF is much faster and the images come out sharp. I think the only thing limiting its AF is my camera the 10D. I do find that it hunts at low light. However, other people I've talked to said they have no issues with low light and the AF with theirs on a newer model.

Thanks for all the help, appreciate it.

I went to the store to compare the two lenses and at the end had decided to buy tamron vc version, for my style of shooting (very often manual focus) the slightly slower and not as quiet focus wasn't enough to sway me towards canon.

So far I have no complains.