Tamron 17-50 or 28-75

[Billie]

I am looking to start my lens collection. Which of these should I start with. I understand that the Tamron 17-50 is supposed to be an upgraded 28-75. Should I purchase the 17-50 or the beloved 28-75?

I am learning indoor and outdoor Portrait Photography.

I currently have:

EF 75-300 4-5.6
35-80mm kit lens (from Rebel 2000)

Thanks in advance for all help and advice.

[Diminished29]

If you have a crop camera go with the 17-50 (you never know if you might need it for group shots, it'll also be great for landscapes as well)

If you have full frame then just go with the 28-75 both lens will produce very similar results from what I've been reading. I'm sure someone else will chime in here soon though to give your a lot more answers, but I hope this helps some.

[Billie]

I forgot to add that I am using a Canon 20D.

[olz]

The only thing I miss about the 18-55mm kit lens was the range! A 17-50mm f/2.8 would be perfect on the 20D. Right now i cover the range with the 12-24mm Tokina and the 28-75mm Tamron, but i guess i could essentially do with one. I haven't read reviews about the optics, but if it's anyway near the 28-75mm don't hesitate.

[jefftaz]

Well that is a hard one based off of you learning indoor and outdoor Portrait Photography. Most agree that the portrait range that is good is some where around 85mm. That on a 20D would be the long end of the 17-55. However the 28-75 also has that range included and a more telephoto side as well. You would need to think of your shooting style and see if you are usually close up to you subjects or shoot further away. For me I would take the 28-75 as I need the extra reach when shooting in a church etc. I can usually compose a group shot where I can stand back a bit and get a good composition. However at times I cannot get close enough and the extra reach of the 28-75 is invaluable. Best of luck, either lens would be great, just think if you need the extra reach or the additional on the wide end.

[Tee Why]

For a cropped sensor, the 17-50 is suppose to give similar range as a 28-75 on a Full frame. If it was me, I'd go for the 17-50. If you plan on getting an ultrawide, then a 28-75 would make a better combo with an ultrawide.

[kram]

The only thing I miss about the 18-55mm kit lens was the range! A 17-50mm f/2.8 would be perfect on the 20D. Right now i cover the range with the 12-24mm Tokina and the 28-75mm Tamron, but i guess i could essentially do with one. I haven't read reviews about the optics, but if it's anyway near the 28-75mm don't hesitate.

Even 17mm on a 20D is still not really wide - cant avoid a 12-24 or 10-20 or 10-22 to get that range.

But yes, between a 28-75 and 17-50, if the optics are good, I would get the 17-50 for sure.

[mrfourcows]

id prefer a 17/18-70/75 f/2.8 lens
too bad the best they've got out in the market is a sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 :(

[olz]

Even 17mm on a 20D is still not really wide - cant avoid a 12-24 or 10-20 or 10-22 to get that range.

But yes, between a 28-75 and 17-50, if the optics are good, I would get the 17-50 for sure.

Yep, I agree. What i meant was, that if I wanted a one lens setup, I would choose the 17-50mm. :) If the optics are good, It will be such a versatile range. Add the 85mm f/1.8 for indoor and outdoor portrait shooting. ;)

[jeronimo]

read the orther treads here in the forum about the 17-50. It's a decend lens for studio shooting. But with high contrast (tree against bright sky e.g.) you get lot's of CA

[Billie]

Thanks everyone! I have been trying to read as much as I can, but it does get overwhelming when you are new and learning.

Thanks again!

[chtgrubbs]

Most people use longer focal length lenses for portraits, so I would go with the 28-75, then add a wider zoom for groups or landscapes as you feel necessary. A slight telephoto effect gives a more pleasing "drawing" of the face and a better perspective to body for full-length photos.

[aRJun]

It all depends on what your usual post processing involves. I noticed that even when using the wider side of the 18-55 kit lens, I used to crop a lot so then it just made sense for me to get the 28-75 (much sharper for my use) and although it's been 2 days since I have it, I already notice the difference. I shoot a narrower field but fill my frame with little or no cropping after that. So it all depends on your shooting style and skill.

[jefftaz]

Here are some recent shots that I took with the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8: