decently priced substitute for 16-35 2.8?

i previously had a sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 and tamron 28-75 in the short FL range, then i sold them away because

1. the sigma FL + aperture was perfect, but the corners had some funky blurriness to it (not even talking about corner sharpness) that makes photos look very distracting, even when stopped down to f11.

2. sold the tamron too because most of the time i'm using the shorter end (28-50mm ish)

now i'm thinking of getting just 1 UWA to suit my needs. is there any alternative to the well-received canon 16-35, or my previous sigma 17-35, but with more decent IQ?

aperture should be 2.8 at the wide end (i don't care how narrow it gets on the tele end)

i've also thought of getting the standard zoom sigma 24-70, but when compared to my tamron 28-75, i can't imagine paying almost double just for an extra 4mm wideness. :/

I'm assuming full frame body?

The Tamron 17-35 2.8-4 is supposed to perform better in the corners than the Sigma, and have a bit better IQ.

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #15477416
I'm assuming full frame body?

The Tamron 17-35 2.8-4 is supposed to perform better in the corners than the Sigma, and have a bit better IQ.

the tamron has the worst corners on FF of any lens i've ever used. it's pretty good for crop though. the OP wants his cake and eat it too. good luck with that one .

ed rader wrote in post #15477423
the tamron has the worst corners on FF of any lens i've ever used. it's pretty good for crop though. the OP wants his cake and eat it too. good luck with that one .

Did you have better corners with the Sigma?

Regarding cake... agreed. But with the OP's requirements, I couldn't think of anything else to recommend trying.

What body?

For a crop, the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS is the best, but it isn't cheap. I see it as you get what you pay for. Buy bargains and there will usually be compromises.

For full frame, I don't know where else you go.

Assuming FF -Tokina 16-28 f2.8?

If crop, then we have a LOT of options starting at 17mm.

what's your idea of 'decently priced'?

there's the tokina 16-28mm f2.8 that's supposed to be pretty good...you could look at older L's

16-35mm f2.8L or 17-35mm f2.8L, or 20-35mm f2.8L...

no clue how well they perform compared to the 16-35II...but they're certainly cheaper...

Sigma 17-50mm 2.8

hmm, i thought it would be obvious from the previous lenses that i'm using a FF body (it'd be a waste to use those lenses on a cropped body when there are other better selections)

decent price means <800usd to me.

i'm trying to find a used one on the market, but it's tough to find the tamron 17-35 (same goes for my sigma..lol).

how's the comparison between tokina 16-28 vs tamron 17-35?

any other alternatives? wide means at least <18mm on my FF.

There is a canon 17-35 f2.8L for sale on the boards, it looks to be quite sharp. Request more sample photos from the seller

At that price, the choice is between the Tokina f2.8 and the 17-40 F4.