Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC vs Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS

Unfortunately I no longer have reliable access to the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC that I have used for over a year on my 7D. It's the property of my employer, and now that we have a dedicated media guy instead of me filling a gap, it stays on his T3i. So that leaves me without a general purpose zoom. In fact, the widest lens I have is the Zeiss 35 f/2, and after that it's the Canon 70-300L.


The Zeiss is amazing and I've thought about trying to rely just on it, but the MF really limits its applications.I'd love the Canon 17-55 f/2.8, but $1100 just doesn't seem right for an EF-S lens. The Canon 15-85 seems great, but I shoot at f/2.8 A LOT and would miss it.


The Tammy has worked quite well for me, especially after a +5 MA. It is quite sharp with great colors and contrast even at f/2.8 -- especially when you consider that it's a $450 lens. But before I spring for another one, I wanted to get opinions about the Sigma, which is $200 more but has IS/OS.


So, what do you say? Thanks for sharing your insights.


Brian

I own the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, and it is my most-used lens (I own 3 primes and 3 zooms). If I could only keep one lens, the 17-55 just might be it. However, it is not without its faults.


If I were on a tight budget, I

What do you mainly shoot at the 17-50 range where you need a image stabilizer? Is it landscape stuff or the more interior side?

Just one other thought. Sell your 7d, throw in the money you were going to use for the 17-50 lens, and get a 5d2 refurb or a used 1ds2. That might make your zeiss wide enough.

@Sean - I have been so tempted in the past to just buy the 17-55....part of it is principle for me, and part of it is budget. I

King,


Just a thought, but I believe lensrentals.com typically puts a lot of their used inventory onsale at Thanksgiving. Last year I considered the 17-55 f/2.8 and it was ~$700. That was before the price increases last February, but Thanksgiving may be a chance to pick up a 17-55 used at a reasonable price. That would also give you a month to try and see how you like shooting with the Zeiss only.


Brant

If you don

I say, go with the Tamron


Mark

I have the Tamron, and is very happy with it. I seldom need IS, so the only draw-back is the slow focus compared to for instance the 85 1.8 (the only fast-focusing lens I have). But I have learnt to get around that problem, and the Tamron never disappoints me.


Lars

Brant,


Are the lensrentals used lenses typically a good value? I