What would you do?

This choice is killing me. There is so much info out there and I seem to find supporting arguments for each option. I hope someone can convince me one is clearly better than the other.
My choices are a new Tamron 17-50 2.8 or a used canon 17-40 4L. The Canon would be about $100 bucks more despite being used (in good condition of course). I'm looking for a versatile lens which will serve me for landscapes and occasional indoor portraits.
Thank-you for helping.

Gotmoose wrote in post #4047129
My choices are a new Tamron 17-50 2.8 or a used canon 17-40 4L...I'm looking for a versatile lens which will serve me for landscapes and occasional indoor portraits

Or how about the 1750 used? Even cheaper. But IMO for your 1.6x sensor, go with the Tamron here.

I haven't been able to locate a used tamron 17-50. I using a 400D by the way.

from what i hear they are both great lenses. but i guess the 2.8 will benefit you more in a lower light setting. you have to expect that a lot of people will probably tell you to go over the L than they tamron.

but thats what i would look at. which one will benefit what i use it for the most. i personally like low light type things for the stuff that i do. so i would choose the tamron. thats is just my 2cents.

shannon

Yeah I'm thinking 2.8 vs 4 may be the deal breaker.