EF, full frame, equivalent of Tamron 17-50?

I want to get the Canon 17-40, but F4 isn't fast enough for my liking. I want it to be 17-50ish, or 17-40ish. Not the"equivalent" to a 1.6X.

Any other suggestions?

Thanks

The fast alternative would be the 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM - expensive though.

You have to know that 17 in FF is actually very very wide, like a 11mm in crop. It's not easy to make a lens wide, fast and high zoom along with good quality. you have to select what you want.

For an APS camera I prefer Tamron 17-50 or Canon 17-55. I own the Tamron and Canon 17-40; when I go out with 7D (before with my 40D) I prefer the Tamron.

In APS cameras with high density of pixels, as 50D or 7D, it's better to use EF-S lens.

Juamba wrote in post #9934581
For an APS camera I prefer Tamron 17-50 or Canon 17-55. I own the Tamron and Canon 17-40; when I go out with 7D (before with my 40D) I prefer the Tamron.

In APS cameras with high density of pixels, as 50D or 7D, it's better to use EF-S lens.

The Canon EF-S 17-55 is not compatible with an APS sensor, only APS-C.

Not sure what you are actually asking.

If you are looking for lens that give you a field of view similar to that of 17-50 on APS-C, you should consider Tamron 28-75 or Canon 24-70 L.

If you are actually looking for a 17-50 lens on FF, you should consider the 16-35, the 24-70 L or the Tamron 28-75 depending on if you are more interested in the long or wide end of 17-50.

sebr is finally right...The 24-70L will equal the 17-50 on 1.6x(but i think the OP was confused a little)

If you have a 5D classic I would go for a Tamron 28-75(cheaper and good optical quality), if you have a mk2 then go for the 24-70L(the sensor will demand L lenses)

Combatmedic870 wrote in post #9934690
sebr is finally right...The 24-70L will equal the 17-50 on 1.6x(but i think the OP was confused a little)

If you have a 5D classic I would go for a Tamron 28-75(cheaper and good optical quality), if you have a mk2 then go for the 24-70L(the sensor will demand L lenses)

Hi, I meant that I want a 17-50mm lens for the canon full frame body. I don't want an "equivalent" like the 28-75, if that makes sense.

Thanks for all of your suggestions. It seems like the canon 16-35mm is an option but very expensive.

I think the 24-70L is the one I'm going to get. It comprises range and price.

Siriusmuzik wrote in post #9934894
I think the 24-70L is the one I'm going to get. It comprises range and price.

If you are buying at a store, see if they have the Sigma 24-70, it is nearly just as good as the Canon IMO. Only real drawbacks are the Sigma has a large 82mm filter ring and not weather sealed.

The Tamron 17-50 was my go to lens on my 20D for the last 2 years. When I bought a 5DM2 I also simultaneously bought a 24-70L, knowing that it would cover my primary focal length requirements. I have not been disappointed.

Siriusmuzik wrote in post #9934536
I want to get the Canon 17-40, but F4 isn't fast enough for my liking. I want it to be 17-50ish, or 17-40ish. Not the"equivalent" to a 1.6X.

Any other suggestions?

Thanks

Siriusmuzik wrote in post #9934884
Hi, I meant that I want a 17-50mm lens for the canon full frame body. I don't want an "equivalent" like the 28-75, if that makes sense.

Thanks for all of your suggestions. It seems like the canon 16-35mm is an option but very expensive.

Siriusmuzik wrote in post #9934894
I think the 24-70L is the one I'm going to get. It comprises range and price.

Your various questions and statements, including the title of the thread are/were very misleading. I am not sure if you were trying to compare something on an APS-C format camera to something for a so-called "full-frame" (35mm film format 24mm x 36mm) body or do you know the focal lengths you are interested for the 35mm format? Even if you've decided on a 24-70, a fantastic lens which I own one of, I am interested in what you were actually asking the group.

Siriusmuzik wrote in post #9934884
Hi, I meant that I want a 17-50mm lens for the canon full frame body. I don't want an "equivalent" like the 28-75, if that makes sense.

Thanks for all of your suggestions. It seems like the canon 16-35mm is an option but very expensive.

There isn't one - a FF 17-50 f/2.8 that is.

I think the OP has a crop body. and either thinking of upgrading to a FF in the future or already has a full frame, and he is looking for a lens that mount on both the crop and the FF camera. But there isn't one, so the OP goes for a 24-70L instead.