why Im going for the 17-40 f4

Instead the Tamron 17-50...

1.- it's a L
2.- There only 300 bux Diff on the price....
3.- Already have a CPL Filter 77 that I use with the 70-200, Sigma 10-20 and Canon 24-70...all are 77mm filters If I go for the Tamron I would nee another filter
4.- I need another L

Am I making sense ?

I need abother L, makes perfect sense to me

Another falls victim to worshipping the L-gods...

TheAztech wrote in post #2137361
Instead the Tamron 17-50...

1.- it's a L
2.- There only 300 bux Diff on the price....
3.- Already have a CPL Filter 77 that I use with the 70-200, Sigma 10-20 and Canon 24-70...all are 77mm filters If I go for the Tamron I would nee another filter
4.- I need another L

Am I making sense ?

i considered the same two lenses and i also bought the 17-40L. i've had tamron lenses and they are great -- but the 17-40L is better and it gives me a seamless transition in color and contrast from my other L lenses.

and as a landscape lens it does everything i want and has excellent IQ.

so you make sense to me .

ed rader

What we say to rationalize things, the sad part is when we say it to ourselves, I can see talking to the little woman about what I NEED . . .

TheAztech wrote in post #2137361
Instead the Tamron 17-50...

1.- it's a L
2.- There only 300 bux Diff on the price....
3.- Already have a CPL Filter 77 that I use with the 70-200, Sigma 10-20 and Canon 24-70...all are 77mm filters If I go for the Tamron I would nee another filter
4.- I need another L

Am I making sense ?

Probably another point

5. Optically the 17-40 L is better then the 17-50 Tamron which is why most people own the 17-40 L.

I went from the Tokina 12-24 to the 17-40 L and I have never, ever once missed my Tokina, this one is just so good.

I didnt even consider the Tamron 17-50 (though I do have their 28-75). I am addicted to "L"s... =P

The difference in price right now after rebates is a little bit more than $100 if only buying 1 qualifying item. B&H has the 17-40 for only $629 using discount code psaug buy another qualifying item before promotion ends and double the rebate which makes the 17-40 about $75 more. Throw in the fact that is has the build quality of an L, the fact that it can be used on full frame sensor’s, and will retain it’s value I personally think it’s an outstanding value.

I guess that’s why I’m waiting for mine to be delivered right now

cjm wrote in post #2137519
Optically the 17-40 L is better then the 17-50 Tamron which is why most people own the 17-40 L.

Can someone else chime in on Tammy 17-50?

I'm missing something here. There are lenses made by other companies for my Canon?

TheAztech, I'm about to get the 24-70L and 85mm 1.8. That'd put me just one lens behind you (your Sigma). Interesting array of glass we'd have. I wonder how many people get that same set-up?

I'd say it's quite logical and makes perfect sense. Personally I prefer the Canon lenses in most cases to a third party one. And the 17-40 is a VERY good lens.

I think the 17-40mm f/4L is one of the best choices anyone can make in a wide ang;e zoom, but I don't find all of your particular stated reasons for choosing it the most logical

The EF17-40L is a lovely lens for sure but buy it for the right reasons, not just because of "L" fever. Theres lots of good lenses out there made by 3rd parties, IMHO I think each lens should be looked at on it's own merits not because of it's brand or label.

Sorry to dissent here, but I have the same choice and am leaning towards the Tamron. The Tamron is available for $429, quite a bit less, and is 10mm longer and a full stop faster. I am sentimental enough that I could live with giving up 2 of those 3 for the Canon, but not all 3 (especially a full stop of aperture). I just can't see paying a lot more for a less capable lens.
Note that I have a 350D and no plans to get a full frame camera - FF is obviously a huge benefit to some, but not to me. In fact, the way I look at it is that Canon is hamstrung in this particular competition by the need to cover FF. I bet the Tamron would be more expensive and F4 if they had to cover FF.

D

I love my 17-40L. I say go for it!

I have a 50mm f/1.4 if I need a fast indoor night time lens...or I can always use a flash or higher ISO.