Tamron 17-50/f2.8 or 28-75/f2.8

This is my first post and what a great forum!
I need help in deciding which lens to go with when I buy the Rebel XTI.
I've been looking at everyone's views on a good multi-use, walk around lens and these two, tamron 17-50/f2.8 or tamron 28-75/f2.8 seem to be highly thought of. Any other suggestions would be welcomed. I would like to be able to photograph nature and portraits, some action if possible and have it be able to work fairly well in low light. Thanks for your help.

I would highly recommend the crop version, 17-50 for your XTi.
But it really depends on your taste. I had to part with my 28-75, because it wasn't wide enough for shots of people indoors in a room.
Action shots indoors? Might want to have a fast prime with a USM or HSM motor instead. The AF servos aren't great on these lenses for this type of shooting. And 2.8, although fast, isn't fast enough for a high shutter speed indoors, unless it's a brightly gym.
IMO, get the 17-50 and think about a fast prime. Canon 50 1.4, 85 1.8, or a Sigma 30 1.4.
Also, try getting to a camera store with these lenses and just try them around the store. You will get a better idea on what focal range works best for YOU.

iwannabe wrote in post #3269795
I would like to be able to photograph nature and portraits, some action if possible and have it be able to work fairly well in low light. Thanks for your help.

This kinda says 28-75 to me. Nothing in that list suggests you need 17mm.

As far as working in fairly low light...umm well f/2.8 isn't all that fast for low light and the lens isn't known for awesome focusing in such conditions...depending of course on your definition of it.

Although I am sure you will enjoy 28-75..
28mm will not be wide enough on your XTi.. because it is roughly 45mm focal length FOV on your cropped image sensor.
With it, you will be very limited to only a portrait shots.
Nature shots will require bit of more wide angle.
So get the 17-50.

I would recommend the 17-50. I have a 28-135 IS and 28mm is just not wide enough for indoor use.

I find that amateurs getting into SLR or dSLR use for the first time will tend to gravitate to longer focal length lenses much sooner than they discover the need/use for wide angles! Notice that most P&S cameras have the equivalence of 35-140mm in 35mm format film cameras with a 4x zoom range...that is like using the 28-75mm on an APS-C camera. And there are relatively few P&S which are 'wide'...28mm rather than 35mm minimum. 28mm in film format is 17mm in APS-C format.

So, 'works best for you' is true! If you find a P&S with 35mm minimum meets your needs, get the 28-75mm. (28mm x 1.6 = 44m, so it is not quite as wide as even an ordinary P&S.) If you find a P&S with 35mm is too limiting in shooting, get the 17-50.

Wilt wrote in post #3269845
I find that amateurs getting into SLR or dSLR use for the first time will tend to gravitate to longer focal length lenses much sooner than they discover the need/use for wide angles! Notice that most P&S cameras have the equivalence of 35-140mm in 35mm format film cameras with a 4x zoom range...that is like using the 28-75mm on an APS-C camera. And there are relatively few P&S which are 'wide'...28mm rather than 35mm minimum. 28mm in film format is 17mm in APS-C format.

So, 'works best for you' is true! If you find a P&S with 35mm minimum meets your needs, get the 28-75mm. (28mm x 1.6 = 44m, so it is not quite as wide as even an ordinary P&S.) If you find a P&S with 35mm is too limiting in shooting, get the 17-50.

That is a really good point you brought up about the focal lengths on P&S's.

WOW! What fast responses! It sounds like the 17-50 may be right for me.
I'm coming off using a G3 and found it quite versatile but I have a hunger to
get a little more serious about my photography. I've found myself leaning more towards
nature and landscape but enjoy doing portraits as well. Thanks for your input!
One more thing. Do any of you know if the 430 ex flash work well with the 17-50?

This is why I tend to tell people to get the kit lens (if they are just starting out with real photography). In the kit it only costs a bit more (under $100) and it is not a bad lens to start off with. Use it for a while and get to know what you need. After a few months (or even just a few week), sample some of your pics and look at the exif info to see what focal lengths, shutter speeds, and apertures you tend to use. If you find that you aren't taking any shots under 24-28mm but taking a ton of 55mm, then you will want a longer lens. If you are shooting everything at speeds over 1/250, you might not need anything faster than a 4.0 aperture. If everything is being taken at 1/30 and ISO 800, you will want to look at IS lenses. I have had the kit and the fifty for about 2 months now, and I am just now looking to see what I am going to get as my everyday walk around lens.

So it sounds like you suggesting that I get the fifty with the kit lens as a starter. I'm just looking for the best options as far as flexibility. Maybe that's the way to go.

iwannabe wrote in post #3270129
So it sounds like you suggesting that I get the fifty with the kit lens as a starter. I'm just looking for the best options as far as flexibility. Maybe that's the way to go.

The kit lens is only $90 more than body-only price from B&H. The 28-75 is about $380 and the 17-50 is about $450 more. If you have a really good idea of your needs, spending $300 more immediately is a good idea. But if you have no comprehension of your needs, keeping investment down initially is not a bad idea. On the other hand, buying one of the lenses and later selling it would not cost you much in terms of depreciation, since these two lenses are quite desirable and have excellent resale. If you buy the kit lens for $90 and it sits on a shelf or your buy and sell the Tamron for -20%, either way it costs almost the same!

I'd hold off the kit lens if you intend to take this as a hobby. It's just not that pleasant to use after a while.
The 28-75mm is a "normal" zoom for Full frames. The 17-50 covers pretty much the same range for cropped sensors like the XTi.

If you want to do landscapes, 17-50mm will be better as 28mm on an XTi is not wide at all. Unless you want the 50mm for something specific, I'd hold off, even it's only $80 as on an XTi, 50mm is more like 80mm and a bit too long unless you intend to use it for headshots or something specific like that.

As for the flash, I think the 430EX is a fine flash and will serve you well.

I'd get the 28-75 f2.8. I have a good copy of it and it seems to work really nicely for most shots. Not sure why so many people think 28mm is bad on a crop camera, I guess they don't realize that for decades the standard focal length was 50mm on a full frame film camera and it did just fine for everyone. 24mm on a crop camera IMO is perfect, and 28mm works well too.

The build on the 28-75 is ok. It is like a really sturdy and strong kit lens. Since both of these lenses are essentially that, a good kit lens. It is not junk but it isn't high quality either, because the focus ring moves when AF is on.

I'm a novice... just to throw that out there..

but I have both, I keep the 28-75 on there the most, I don't know if its because it was my first real lens or not but I LOVE it, I use it about 2/3rds as much as the 17-50, but the 17-50 DEFF has its place... but it really depends on what YOU want..

cjm wrote in post #3271338
I'd get the 28-75 f2.8. I have a good copy of it and it seems to work really nicely for most shots. Not sure why so many people think 28mm is bad on a crop camera, I guess they don't realize that for decades the standard focal length was 50mm on a full frame film camera and it did just fine for everyone. 24mm on a crop camera IMO is perfect, and 28mm works well too.

The build on the 28-75 is ok. It is like a really sturdy and strong kit lens. Since both of these lenses are essentially that, a good kit lens. It is not junk but it isn't high quality either, because the focus ring moves when AF is on.

I guess you don't realize that 28-70 was the normal zoom lens on a FF camera for years.
I really hate it when people talk down to others like your statement.