Printable View
Travis, look into the Tamron 17-50/2.8 and an 85/1.8, 50/1.4 or Sigma 30/1.4. The 17-40 will focus quicker than the Tamron but it won't offer f/2.8 and it's not as sharp. If you want the best all around IQ/performance sub the Tamron for the 17-55 and wait until you can afford a prime--don't blow your whole load all at once.
By the way, just thought of the Tamron 17-50/2.8, which is apparently an excellent lens optically but lack of IS, FTM andbuild quality. BUT the Tamron is not even half as expensive as the Canon 17-55/2.8 for the same kid of functionality!! That's a big big deal! So I just wonder if the goal is an APS-C lens, why not the Tamron then? It actually appears sharper than the Canon and it has less vignette. (from Bryan's test)
Just my random thoughts, no offence...[:)]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin
Beat you to it--Read the above post ;) I actually own one and its one of the sharpest lenses I've used. BQ isn't L-grade but its solid enough for most people. The only qualm I have with it is AF speed, which is decent but not recommended for fast action in low light. It's deffinitely, if not THE, one of the biggest bang for the buck lenses out there.