range or speed? 28-75/2.8 OR 28-135/3.5-5.6

The question is should I get the Tamron 28-75/2.8 OR Canon EF 28-135/3.5-5.6?

The purpose of the lens would be as an all around starter for the 20D (want the body only). I've researched both lenses, and they are similar in price. I do know, however that many would not go slower than 2.8.

What is more important to most ppl: Range or speed?

Thanks for any info.

Speed. For me at least. That's why I want a prime collection

I'd get the 28-75 first, then add a 70-200 (sigma or canon) to the collection later. Hyperzooms aren't so good in quality, and as you can see, it's not that quick either.

However, I hear the 28-135 is a decent lens for what it does...

remember to that the IS will give you 2 stops of hand holding ability in Low light. Never had a tamron 28-75, but I can say that my canon 28-135 is a nice AP lens.

Thanks guys. I also searched the topic and found lots of feedback (sorry, noob here, of course I should've done that first.)

Leaning toward the Tamron 28-75 ~ they say it is sharper than the EF 28-135. For me, sharpness and contrast will beat out the extra range.

i highly recommend the tamron, its sharp fast and cheap

If you are only going to get one lens, the Canon should be a good fit because it has alot of range. But if you think you are going to be getting multiple lenses, I'd go with the Tamron. Reason being are that most zoom are in the 70-200, 70-300 range. If you have the Canon, you have a ton of overlap. If you get the Tamron, you have no (okay just a tiny bit 5mm) overlap. I decided that was going to be getting more than one lens so I went with the Tamron. I have a Canon 70-200 being shipped to me, so I have very nice coverage with no overlap.

SSSSPPPPEEEEEEEDDDDD!

Definitely the Tamron, I don't buy lenses slower than F2.8. IS doesn't help if you're taking photos of moving things (people) in low light, fast lenses do.

My God Radar, do you have a caddy for all that gear....lol

I have both lenses and the 28-135 has been relegated to the shelf. f/5.6 at 135mm just doesn't cut it for me.

I really ought to sell my 28-135 to someone who will use it. Hmm, I've been eyeing an 85/1.8 for a long time. Selling the 28-135 would probably pay for it and then some.

A lot of telezooms will overlap some of the range of the 28-135. I would go for speed.

mrclark321 wrote:
My God Radar, do you have a caddy for all that gear....lol

I need one. I am packing this weekend for a July 1st trip to Alberta and British Columbia for 16 days or so. It's tricky planning for airline weights and restrictions. When I can take my cargo van, then everything goes! I will be taking two Pelican hardside 1650's and whatever size backpack I can get away with. I'm going to Newark airport later this week to Air Canada to show them some packs and see what they say. On my back, it gets up to 61 pounds. I'm only 5'9", but quite strong. I have a few tour guides booked for my trip and sometimes they'll help out.