-
I have owned the Canon 17-55mm and I now have the Tamron 17-50 non-VC and I am extremely pleased with it. When I look at my photos taken with each, I do not see any difference in IQ. Do I miss my 17-55mm? You betcha! Why? Heck, because it's a Canon! It's just the psychological aspect of it, knowing I once had the Canon and now I have the Tamron. Of course, Canon's IS is an awesome thing but it comes at one heck of a price tag. Close to what you would pay for a Canon 17-55mm IS, you could get the Tamron 17-50 non-VC, a non-Canon ultra-wide (which I think Bryan gave a thumbs up on the Sigma 8-16mm) and a 430ex II! If you bought any of them used or refurbished, you would still have money left over!
Denise
EDIT: Oops, forgot to mention that I too started with the 300mm for birding and soon switched to the 100-400mm for the same reasons as Neuro. 300mm is definitely not long enough for birding in the wild and as time goes on, I am becoming more and more frustrated with 400mm still not being enough. Just a couple days ago, I couldn't believe how many BIF I hit my focus right on the mark but when I got home and got them on my computer, most ended up in the recycle bin because after cropping they weren't worth keeping.
Last edited by ddt0725; 12-30-2011 at 04:54 AM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules