Tamron 28-75 vs. Canon 28-135

[bcaloia]

Ok... I am leaving for New Orleans soon and I would like to get a lens for walking the street. I have been unhappy with the sharpness of the two Sigma lenses I own (28-80 and 70-300) so far... but I am a beginner. I plan on purchasing either the Tamron 28-75 lens or the Canon 28-135, but can't decide on which. Any thoughts? I will be photographing architecture, wildlife and of course my girlfriend. I will be taking my Canon 50mm 1.8 with me too. Any suggestions?

DrBC

[tim]

Tamron = sharper and faster (wide aperture), Canon = IS and more reach. Have a read of this (http://www.photographyreview.com/Lenses/PSC_3787crx.aspx) site.

There are lots of threads comparing these two lenses, they might give you a few more opinions.

[condyk]

If you're walking the street of New Orleans then 'wildlife' will be irrelevant I'd have thought. The extra length of the IS could just be useful, but for general day to day city/people shots I'd go for the Tamron. I just sold my IS for the Tamron, for standard carry around use.

[mr.photoguy]

Tamron lens all the way . .

It's so sharp, and contrasty it's scary..

[Gary W. Graley]

I had the Tamron for a day, not long to make a good comparison, but what threw me off was the rotating focusing ring, where I naturally grip the lens was in that spot, but as to the images, they were very nice and sharp.
I ended up with the 28-135 IS and found shooting it on the AI Servo mode serves me best, here is a shot taken yesterday with the wind blowing,

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/GaryWGraley/EOS%2020D/28-135/28-135flower.jpg

G2

[mikesd]

This is a question only you can answer, the Tamron is sharper, the Canon is longer and has IS. I have had both and prefer the 28-135 for a walkaround lens. They are both good lenses so one just has to decide what is most important to them. PS, nice shot Gary

Mike

[Jackal]

http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/28_75_Di/page4.html ;)

[DavidEB]

New Orleans is an excellent place to photograph wildlife. the wildest.

[Gary W. Graley]

Thanks Mike, it is a crop of the original image, also rotated to give me that angle of the branch as well.
G2

[bcaloia]

First off, I want to thank everyone for the advice. After printing some of the 'less sharp' images I have taken with my Sigma lenses, it occurred to me that they are pleny sharp for the prints I need. With that in mind, the extra reach of the 28-135 pushed me over to buying it. I am wondering how one can tell if the IS feature is working, though. I have it on, and I don't notice any difference in how the lens feels or sounds. I just want to make sure it is working properly. How can you tell if it is working? Anyway... I am off to NOLA... thanks again!

DrBC

[CyberDyneSystems]

Did you take a look at the -=TOP 10=- Recommended lens sectionat the top of the Forum page?

Theses two lenses are included in the -=TOP 10=- "Starter lenses" poll,. you can see how forum members voted on these two and what others should be considered.

[bcaloia]

A shot or two from the Big Easy. I was happy with my choice, and I thank you all again!

DrBC

[cheme]

Here's a vote for the Tamron. I use it as my walk around lens.

[blue_max]

This boils down to a vote for absolute image quality versus convenience. The Canon is a damned site better than most people will get not using a DSLR.

There is no right and wrong. One could almost have both (if one was rich).

Graham

[markubig]

i have the tamron and love its sharpness. I played with my friend's 28-135 at a wedding this past weekend and I loved the reach. Have fun in Newawwwlens!