Buying either Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 or 28-75 F/2.8

So I dont have a ton of money to spend on another Canon L lenss

So im going to try out a 3rd party one. Ive heard good thing about the Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DI-II LD IF PO WTF

but I saw that they also have a 28-75mm F/2.8 XR DI II LD IF

My question is which one do people usually say is better? Would the DI-II be better for my Rebel XT? Im looking for a lens to basically replace my 18-55mm kit lens. I have the 70-200 F/4L so im covered on length..

Thanks

Both are good lenses for the money. If you find that you will miss shooting at 18mm on your kit lens (like if you shoot frequently at that focal range) then the 17-50mm will work out better. You won't miss the 50-70mm gap in that case.

blssdwlf wrote in post #4230559
You won't miss the 50-70mm gap

I agree. The wider angle of the 17-50 comes in handy. The lens has great IQ too.

...and the constant 2.8 is handy too (17-50).

17-50....

Great lens, better range on a crop.

79TAKid wrote in post #4230312
the Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DI-II LD IF PO WTF

Had me laughing...thanks


This is the next lens I'm getting...I've heard great things about it.

i really enjoy my 28-75mm.

Mooseknuckle wrote in post #4236361
Had me laughing...thanks


This is the next lens I'm getting...I've heard great things about it.

yeah Ive heard lots off good things.... Yeah I was seeing if anyone would notice that

You might also consider the Sigma 17-70 and 18-50 f/2.8 macro. Very good lenses and the 18-50 is extremely well-built.

I've got both. They're both great lenses.

Either will serve you well.

I seem to have had more of a learning curve with the wider lens. Probably due to DOF issues on close subjects such as indoor shots. But that is just problematic with the focal range, not the lens itself.

The 28-75 was a pleasure to use from the first shot on.

Outdoors, I use the 28-75 unless I specifically want a wide panarama for a landscape.

Indoors I keep the 17-50 on the camera.

Of course these are generalizations! I use them both so much I wouldn't want to be with out either.

Jman13 wrote in post #4236316
17-50....

Great lens, better range on a crop.

Exactly.

28mm isn't nearly wide enough for me. And I couldn't care less about missing 50-70mm.

Tony-S wrote in post #4236662
You might also consider the Sigma 17-70

I was thinking the same but I'm torn btwn the tamron 28-75 or the Sigma 17-70. I do both in and outdoor shots and also night shots..I already have a 50 1.8, kit lens that came with the xt and a sigma 70-300..I have seen the picture thread of the Sigma 17-70..And all of those look good..


Any suggestions???:o

tam 17-50.
Should have got that instead.

both are excellent.

if you like the kit lens range, you'll be happy with the 17-50SP. but the 28-75SP is very nice for portraits giving you approximately 45-120mm.

It's worth noting that the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 is now available with HSM (its full title is 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM). It's a great lens, and HSM is pretty close to USM in terms of performance.