Sigma 17-70 vs Tamron 17-50?

Which lens would you rather have? Please vote as if range, speed or price didn't matter.

Vote in terms of IQ, Sharpness, Contrast etc...

This poll will help me buy my replacement lens for the kit lens.

Taking range (Sigma's big advantage) and speed (Tamron's big advantage) out of the equation... I would say just for IQ it's probably a wash. However, Range and Speed SHOULD come into play. Just decide what is more important to you between the two.

Range and speed are probably the top two reasons people buy a certain lens. 50mm f/1.4 is a fast lens, but if it's not the range you need it will do you no good. Sigma's 18-200mm OS has probably the most versatile range of any lens, but if you shoot indoors or in the shade, it won't work.

My reason isn't for speed or for range. They both have the same wide range, which is what I need. I just need to know which of the two is sharpest etc...I already have range covered with my 70-200mm f/4L, as you can see in my sig .

Tamron for the constant 2.8. The variable aperture drives me crazy in low light

3 for Sigma, 4 for Tamron so far.

What about the Sigma 18-50 2.8?

I was debating the exact same thing - and finally went with the Siggy. The sheer versatility won. It could do a little bit of everything - and do it well - including some Macro (1:2.3 I think.) It has acceptable optics and even more acceptable IQ (IMHO)

While Tamron is a sharp lens, I did not see that flexibility with the Tamron - I needed it for a walkabout lens and this is where the flexibility won.

After a lot of web research, I ordered the Sigma 17-70 F2.8 lens just yesterday. I found a lot of positive stuff on the web for this lens. I wanted a good walk around lens that was sharp, but still affordable.
I'm making the move up from my kit lens, but couldn't quite afford the jump to the L series. So, fingers crossed, the Sigma will be exactly what I am looking for!

16-35L ftw.

OR the Tamron . Tack sharp and f2.8 is nice

L

Wow, I guess the Tamron wins!