Tamron 17-50 f2.8 vc or Canon EF-S 15-85?

Decisions, Decisions! Which one to use the Tamron @ 2.8 or the 15-85 with extra reach. I am seriously considering the tammy @ 2.8 coupled with a 85 1.8, then sell my wife and kid. I have to keep the dog and buy the 70-200L f/4 IS later down the road when it is more affordable. I have been studying both copies and they seem very similar, but very different @ the same time. Oh, back to my research. Thanks for your advice!

Range vs Speed... It's always the same decisions

I chose 15-85 since it goes quite wide and long at the same time and minimizes lens swaps.
I also pair that with a fast prime (Sigma 30) which gets me much more low light and DOF performance then f2.8
For me this is perfect since majority of my shots are outdoor and travel.

If I was planning more indoor and portrait maybe the 17-55 and 85 would be a better choice.

How often do you use your 17-85 on the long end? Do you bring your 70-200 with you all the time in case you need the reach?

Back when the 40D just came out, it was easy: go from 17-85 to 17-55/2.8 IS plus 70-200/4L IS. There was no 15-85.

These days I can see getting the 15-85 instead for the reach. Those f/2.8 zooms can be big and heavy. Using the 15-85 by itself gives you more flexibility than having just a 17-55/2.8.

Having said that, for my purposes, I'd would definitely go f/2.8 again.

Actually quite a bit, but having said that I would like to have the 2.8 for indoors shooting. I do a lot of family events(people shy away from long in your face lens and flashes especially) and such that lends itself to need a faster and wider aperture more so than the longer reach. If I have the 17-50 2.8, I can sell the 17-85 and get an 85 1.8 to cover the extra reach when I need it. I am going to get the 70-200 f/4 IS in the next few months if I can get all my duck in a row. So I guess it sounds like I have made up my mind almost.