Canon 18-55 IS or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8

OK, I have a new XSi kit and I am trying to decide if I should sell the 18-55mm IS for the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. I don't want to spring for the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS at this time.

I am novice shooting mainly landscape and family shots, including my 7-year old daughter and her friends.

Please help me decide.

Why do you want to sell the kit? funds for the Tamron?
The tamron is around 400$, for the amount you'll get from the kit I'd rather keep it for when you decide to sell the XSI to upgrade your body.
The kit will give more value to your XSI at the time of sale..
Just my 2 cents

Either would be fine for landscapes, although the IS might help.

As for your family shots, do they tend to of stationary or active people (I'm guessing active) and what are the normal lighting conditions? Low light and moving subjects you want to "freeze" would favour the Tamron; stationary subjects would favour the Canon.

borism wrote in post #6605711
Why do you want to sell the kit? funds for the Tamron?
The tamron is around 400$, for the amount you'll get from the kit I'd rather keep it for when you decide to sell the XSI to upgrade your body.
The kit will give more value to your XSI at the time of sale..
Just my 2 cents

I would sell the kit to help fund the tamron. I'm wondering if the IQ is substantialy better with the Tamron. I may take advantage of the 25% off eBay live.com cash back deal. Money is of some concern at this time.

xarqi wrote in post #6605790
Either would be fine for landscapes, although the IS might help.

As for your family shots, do they tend to of stationary or active people (I'm guessing active) and what are the normal lighting conditions? Low light and moving subjects you want to "freeze" would favour the Tamron; stationary subjects would favour the Canon.

I would lean torward more action shots than not and usually less than desirable lighting. I live a gloomy and rainy part of the country.

The 18-55IS is a decent little lens, and since money is a concern, I would try it out for a while and see if it can do what you need it to. If you find you really need the 2.8, then the 17-50 is an excellent lens, or even a Sigma 24-60 f/2.8, which is closer to the price of the 18-55 (about 220 new).

Jesse Webb wrote in post #6606082
I would lean torward more action shots than not and usually less than desirable lighting. I live a gloomy and rainy part of the country.

Thanks for the update. That would probably tend to favour the Tamron, but...

I think Shooter McG. has offered sound advice. See how you get on with the 18-55 IS. It is really a pretty decent lens and does everything that could reasonably be expected of it well. If it doesn't deliver for you, then it's time to think about spending more to address a specific problem that you are actually facing.

I'm voting for keeping the 18-55 IS for the moment.

shooter mcgavin wrote in post #6606092
The 18-55IS is a decent little lens, and since money is a concern, I would try it out for a while and see if it can do what you need it to. If you find you really need the 2.8, then the 17-50 is an excellent lens, or even a Sigma 24-60 f/2.8, which is closer to the price of the 18-55 (about 220 new).

As others have said
The 18-55 IS is a extremely capable lens, you can loo many reviews around and even the many pics taken with te kit around this forum.
The 17-50 f2.8 should be on your list if you need a faster lens for low light.
It is the natural next replacement of your kit lens in terms of better IQ and sharper image, to me at least
Now, I wouldnt consider the Sigma 24-60 a direct replacement to the kit, as 24mm is far longer (or not as wide) than 18mm on a crop body as the XSI
But is looks like a good option to consider if you need a good quality, fast inexpensive lens in that range.

Good luck!

Can someone tell me is the EFS18-55 IS a better lens than the EFS18-55 non IS, which is the kit lens for my 400d? I thought I saw a thread with a link to a report on this lens (The IS version) but danged if I can find it again.

I am asking because I have found one for sale on NZ auction site, (TradeMe) not far from where I live, at what appears to be a good price.

Better how? As far as optics go, I believe there has been quite an improvement from the old kit lens to this IS lens. Besides optics and the IS, there really isn't much that has been improved, at least not that I noticed. To me, the texture of the zoom ring feels a bit better, but other than that the build is still pretty much still what you pay for, and the manual-focus ring is just sad, but I live with a similar one on my 50mm just fine, so I guess it just depends. I would say that it is a better lens, but I think there are still better lenses yet that could be had for a similar price, but if you like your 18-55 and just want a little better quality in a similar package, go for it.

Either of these might help.

http://www.photozone.d​e …56-is-test-report--review

http://www.fredmiranda​.com …=335&sort=7&cat​=27&page=3

kiwichris wrote in post #6606269
Can someone tell me is the EFS18-55 IS a better lens than the EFS18-55 non IS, which is the kit lens for my 400d? I thought I saw a thread with a link to a report on this lens (The IS version) but danged if I can find it again.

I am asking because I have found one for sale on NZ auction site, (TradeMe) not far from where I live, at what appears to be a good price.

ABSOLUTELY!
The difference is night and day. The IS lens has much better optics (my non-IS was &^%# awful), better build, and 4 stop IS. It is a joy to use, and does everything you could reasonably expect it to. The non-IS disappointed me in every possible way except price, even taking into consideration my low expectation.

Oh - P.S.
I actually prefer it to the more expensive Sigma 17-70 I had, and not just because of the lousy Sigma service in NZ.

shooter mcgavin wrote in post #6606298
Better how? As far as optics go, I believe there has been quite an improvement from the old kit lens to this IS lens. Besides optics and the IS, there really isn't much that has been improved, at least not that I noticed. To me, the texture of the zoom ring feels a bit better, but other than that the build is still pretty much still what you pay for, and the manual-focus ring is just sad, but I live with a similar one on my 50mm just fine, so I guess it just depends. I would say that it is a better lens, but I think there are still better lenses yet that could be had for a similar price, but if you like your 18-55 and just want a little better quality in a similar package, go for it.

Thanks for that, yes I am on a really limited budget, and have been somewhat disapointed at the 'softness' I get with the non IS version. Thankyou for the links, am off to bid so will see how I go

good luck!

Bid is in and thanks to both shooter mcgavin and xarqi