Lens Comparison

[Jetmech1]

Here are 2 lens I'm considering, please post comments on each. Keep in mind that I'm trying to keep the cost down. I'm leaning towards the Canon, but is it almost $300 better than the Tamron. I've never used either lens and I've searched here and read info about the 17-40.

Tamron - 17-35mm SP F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical

Canon - 17-40mm F4 L USM EF Lens

On Edit: I may also consider the Canon 17-85 IS

[Me_XMan]

Buy Canon 17-40L and you will never be more pleased.

[NBEast]

You already have a 28-135 IS and I've heard over and over the 17 - 85 IS is lackluster. IS is much less critical on the wide end.

The Canon L (should) be better, and if not more likely the manufacturer would correct it. The Tamron has reports of bad copies, but given a good one ...

[karusel]

I don't shoot a lot of wide angle and if I do I don't usually want a blurred background and close down the aperture so the pictures get sharp, not that the 17-35 is soft as a feather wide open... it's just not really sharp.

[malla1962]

17-40 all the way.:D:D:D:D

[gcogger]

I suggest that you do a search on the Canon Lens forum at www.dpreview.com
This has been discussed a number of times there and, from the comparison pics I've seen, the Tamron is every bit as good as the Canon.

[Mr. Pickles]

The only places the Tamron is as good as the Canon is in the Wide end, and at fighting Distortions. Otherwise, the Canon is better at its Long end, especially when used wide open. The Tamron is very slow to auto-focus, but maybe you don't care? The Tamron also had more "flare" than the Canon, but you could not find yourself in that situation?

I'd say if you got the Tamron, sooner or later, you'd want to try the Canon. When you did, you'd probably want one. Until something better comes out...

[Jetmech1]

Thanks for all the replies. The 17-40 is next on my list.

[Slaggie]

My 17-40 is a week old, you will not be sorry you went for it. George :-)

[gcogger]

The only places the Tamron is as good as the Canon is in the Wide end, and at fighting Distortions. Otherwise, the Canon is better at its Long end, especially when used wide open. The Tamron is very slow to auto-focus, but maybe you don't care? The Tamron also had more "flare" than the Canon, but you could not find yourself in that situation?

I'd say if you got the Tamron, sooner or later, you'd want to try the Canon. When you did, you'd probably want one. Until something better comes out...
I'll grant you that the AF may be slower. That's often the main weakness of 3rd part lenses, although 'slow' is purely relative - it's not usually a problem for me.
As to your other points, there's nothing in the comparison images I've seen that suggest the Tamron is poorer at the long end. Of course, it doesn't go quite as long, which may be a consideration.
Do you have any comparisons that show the Tamron to have greater problems with flare?