Tamron 17-35 F/2.8-4 vs Canon 17-40 F/4

[mchristsen]

I am in the process of purchasing a Wide Angle Lens for my Canon 10D. I was set to buy the Canon 17-40mm F/4L but I was told about the Tamron 17-35 F/2.8-4 which retails at about half the price of the Canon. Has anyone compared the two lenses? I was told that the Canon was not worth the extra money based on the similar characteristics of the Tamron.

I spent a good part of a couple of days researching the Canon without finding any reference to theTamron.

What is your opinion? I am an amateur photographer, so I am not producing professional images, however I want to grow into this hobby with equipment that will serve me well.

Thanks
Mike

PS
I have been reading this forum since I got my 10D and have found it very useful. Kudos to you all.

[jalafer]

I have the Canon 17-40L f4. One think you should take into account is that the 2,8 of the Tamron is only valid for the 17mm length, at all the other lengths, it is f4, so you don't have a real difference in speed.
In the other hand the Canon arrives to 40mm when the Tamron is only 35mm, IMO this is to short (40mm is short already). Other issue is the building quality, the Canon is the best builded lens I ever had, (even better than my old Nikkors). Also the lens does not extend when zooming which is really nice in real use.
In conclusion I can recommend you the Canon, it is worth the difference in the price.

[chris.bailey]

The Canon is a purchase that you will be happy with for many years to come, the 17-40 is a great lens and by L glass standards a bargain. With the Tamron you will always wonder if the Canon would have been better.

[Olegis]

If you want WIDE - go for something wider than 17mm (=27mm on x1.6 crop body). I recently got myself a Sigma 15-30mm and it seems like a very nice lens. It also much wider than the 17mm, it gives me 24mm on my 10D.
Here is the original thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=35762) with samples.

[defordphoto]

The Canon 17-40 is L-glass. It is very difficult to find anything to match Canon L-glass. The 17-40 is an excellent piece of glass rivaling and sometimes exceeding its much more expensive 16-35L brother. I have one and love it.

[mchristsen]

Thanks to you all.

I am the sort of person who knows what they want until something is presented that could be better. I felt that the Canon was a better choice overall.

Now I have to get one ordered so it arrives before I go home to Australia (thus the reason for buying! :D ).

Again thanks, you guys and this forum are a great resource!!

Mike

[nucki]

If you want WIDE - go for something wider than 17mm (=27mm on x1.6 crop body). I recently got myself a Sigma 15-30mm and it seems like a very nice lens. It also much wider than the 17mm, it gives me 24mm on my 10D.
Here is the original thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=35762) with samples.

if you want to see some shots with the sigma 15-30EX DG or the sigma 12-24 EX DG, visit my page at www.pixelbeisser.at

hmmm... I have just seen that there seems to be a problem on my webserver... so right now... no photos... but come back soon, hope it will work again...


best regards
Peter

[mchristsen]

Thanks Nucki, will do.

[jalafer]

Just to complicate a little more your choice.
Today I bought a french magazine "le chasseur d'images" they tested the Tamron and also the new version of the Sigma 17-35 2,8/4. The results of the Sigma are slightly better than the Tamron.
Sharp is pretty similar, both of them are good full open and very good from f4, but the Sigma is better in distortion. Building construction better in the Sigma (EX) but weight and diameter are also slightly bigger.

[RikWriter]

Of the two, I like my Sigma 12-24. :D