Totally Split Down The Middle....

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 or Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8

I've been going through the archive and old threads to see what is the hands down favorite.....I cant decide at all. People say that they both have the same IQ,; then some say that the 17-50 has better IQ; then some say the 28-75 has better IQ

Focal length is oviously the decider here but 28mm isnt wide enough sometimes and 50mm isnt long enough.....i said HEY! what about the sigma 17-70mm....but i NEED the f/2.8....

I'm about to make a decision in a couple days....I need some serious convincing.....for the price range of ~$400 either of the Tamrons are the best choice for general purpose

Right now im slightly leaning toward the 28-75 for its long end, but idk if ill need the wider end....arg

Here's a challenge: CONVINCE ME!!!

i would go with the 17-50; #1 if 70 has enough reach so will the 50 if you come closer to the; if 28 is not wide enough chances are you will not have room to walk back in that shooting environment to get the width necessary

The 17-50 allows you to take pictures you can't get with the 28-75.

The 28-75 allows some pictures to be captured with a bit higher quality since you need to crop less.

http://www.snapfiles.c​om/get/ExposurePlot.ht​ml

I was making this same decision a couple of weeks ago. I got the Tamron 28-75. This is to replace my kit lens the 18-55. I was worried about the wide end but when using the kit lens I seemed to always wish I had more length then wishing I had more wide end.

I went to a local camera store and tried out both on my camera. I shot the Tamron 17-50 at wide and full zoom. Then shot the Tamron 28-75 wide and full zoom. Looking at the difference between the two at the wide end I made up my mind that the 28-75 was for me. Looking at he photos it looked like if I needed wider with the 28-75 I could take 2 steps back and it would be the same as the 17-50.

I have had the lens for about a week and it is great!. I have been getting tons more keepers from this lens then my kit and 50mm lens combined. I now have the kit lens to cover the 18-55 range, the 50mm and the Tamron 28-75 and also the 70-200F4. Great line up for my money.

Would always recommend the Tamron 28-75 but you have to decide which one is for you. I don't think you can go wrong with either one.

Some photos from the Tamron 28-75 lens.
Photo 1

G19 wrote in post #3842524
Looking at he photos it looked like if I needed wider with the 28-75 I could take 2 steps back and it would be the same as the 17-50.

Taking two steps back is only possible if the target is quite close. A large catedral may require many steps and a mountain range may take a full hiking session.

Very quick opinion, but still valid I feel: it's easy to zoom and crop a good-quality image in PP. Not so easy to do something with parts of the picture you couldn't take!

I would go shorter, not longer. (IQ must still be a factor, though, so test each lens all the way through their lengths/aps.)

pwm2 wrote in post #3844026
Taking two steps back is only possible if the target is quite close. A large catedral may require many steps and a mountain range may take a full hiking session.

Exactly, just came back from Rome and the buildings are huge there! I found myself a couple of times with my back against a building because I wanted to take a shot of the whole building.
I'm using a 17-50 myself, and I'm very happy with it.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

For a crop camera, the 17-50. If you want more reach, get a telephoto zoom (or an 85 f/1.8 ). The wide angle is a lot harder to move to get than the telephoto end (the difference between 50 and 75mm is a few steps most of the time.)

One thing I don't see mentioned here is that for a portrait, 75@2.8 gives a nicer subject isolation than 50@2.8... PS: I'm in the same dilemma here, so I'm keeping an eye on this one.

I'd love an 85 1.8, however, indoor portraits would be a bit difficult as the working distance is too great, however, for outdoors it would be amazing. Unfortunately, for now, I'm only able to get one, so I'm ping-ponging between the three aforementioned lenses.

Richard P.

what lens do you have now? what do you mostly shoot? is this going to be your only lens? If you dont mind switching lenses, and want to spend the least amount of money for the best range, get an ulta wide, like sigma 10-20, and the 28-75. If you are mostly doing portraits indoor, get 28-75. If you are looking for a walk around lens, get the 17-50. I tell you that I have both the canon 17-55 Is, and the tamron 28-75. unless I am doing portrait pictures with fill flash, the canon gets used. and the IQ is very similar between the two. I just cant get myself to give up the tamron, b/c I happen to have an amazingly good copy of the lens.