Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS vs Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC

Hey there, at the end of this year I'll travel to the US (I live in Guatemala), I'll travel to Miami and Orlando (Disney, Universal...) and I'm thinking in changing my 17-40mm for one of these two lenses: the new Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS and the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC (or IS). Should I change my 17-40mm for one of those two lenses? I'll also buy the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC.

Thanks!

Why are you considering the change..Is it mostly for the IS/VC?

well, they are two very different lenses, so I think you need to assess your needs. If its a replacement for the 17-40, then the 16-35 is a no brainer. But of you find yourself wanting more standard focal lengths in a zoom, the 24-70 would be a great choice.

1Tanker wrote in post #17015195
Why are you considering the change..Is it mostly for the IS/VC?

Because I don't want to be changing the lens a lot of times :S. Also the IS/VC is very nice for low-light, I think, you can also take some long-exposure photos with the IS/VC (1/2-1/4s)...

gnome chompski wrote in post #17015418
well, they are two very different lenses, so I think you need to assess your needs. If its a replacement for the 17-40, then the 16-35 is a no brainer. But of you find yourself wanting more standard focal lengths in a zoom, the 24-70 would be a great choice.

But do you think I should sell the 17-40mm to get one of those two, or should I keep the 17-40mm?

Which lens is more "usable"?

This seems a bit like comparing a fine scotch to an adjustable wrench. They are different tools with different purposes.

How often do you shoot wider than 24mm?

1/20s is the best I can do with the Tamron 2470 with a > 50% non-blurry rate. If you want long exposure, tripod is a must.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17015810
This seems a bit like comparing a fine scotch to an adjustable wrench. They are different tools with different purposes.

Which one is the scotch and which one is the wrench?

Never having used either, I'll go with the 16-35 f/4 as the scotch and the Tammy as the crescent wrench. I just don't see the comparison between 16-35 and 24-70. Comparing 24-70s or UWA zooms make sense. Comparing one to the other is odd. You can totally need one of these lenses and have no use for the other.

Which lens do I need the 24L II or the 600 f/4?

By the way, of the two, I'd take a 16-35 f/4.

Well I'd rather have a bottle of scotch then a crescent wrech but I'd take the 24-70. I like that focal length better (for what I like to shoot) and I really like to have f2.8. But we may like to take pictures of different things....

Thanks for your comments!

I guess I'll be getting the 16-35mm and if possible the 24-70mm.