Tamron; 17-50 or 28-75?

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

So both have a constant max aperture of 2.8. A big subject for me is shooting concerts. I am on a 450d so the 17-50 becomes a 27.2-80 and the 28-75 a 44.8-120.

At concerts I have been exclusively using the 50 1.8. Roughly 80% of the time, when I wish that I had a zoom lens, I wish I could go wider, often times a lot wider. But there are those occasionally instances where I want I longer focal length.

At this point the 28-75 seems like the better choice. Is either lens more prone to flare? Is one generally sharper, especially when wide open? Any insight would be really helpful.

Thanks.

28-75 would be my choice. I had a few copies of each and the 28-75 was sharper every time.

Consider a wide angle zoom to slap on for the wide shots.

I use a 28-75 for concerts on a FF. The 17-50 would be equivalent on a crop. Then again I have and do use other lenses during a show, so keep that in mind.

It really depends on the venue, imo. I shot last week in a smaller club/stage and used a 24L and 28-75, exclusively. I could have also used a slightly longer lens but did well without it. I've shot there before so knew I could leave a lot of lenses at home. Venue is important. I've used everything from 17 to 300 shooting concerts.

I find the 28-75 handles flare, well enough. I don't consider the 28-75 having a flare problem. I don't know about the 17-50.

TeenPhotog wrote in post #11398778
Thanks for taking the time to read this.

So both have a constant max aperture of 2.8. A big subject for me is shooting concerts. I am on a 450d so the 17-50 becomes a 27.2-80 and the 28-75 a 44.8-120.

At concerts I have been exclusively using the 50 1.8. Roughly 80% of the time, when I wish that I had a zoom lens, I wish I could go wider, often times a lot wider. But there are those occasionally instances where I want I longer focal length.

At this point the 28-75 seems like the better choice. Is either lens more prone to flare? Is one generally sharper, especially when wide open? Any insight would be really helpful.

Thanks.

17-50 remains 17-50. 28-75 remains 28-75. It doesn't change!

The FOV comparison only has meaning if you are comig from a FF and now shoot a crop or you have both. Other than that, I have no idea why anyone even mentions the equivalent FOV which I believe the OP was doing.

Yes 17 is 17 is 17mm.

Try looking at a 85 1.8.

bohdank wrote in post #11398974
The FOV comparison only has meaning if you are comig from a FF and now shoot a crop or you have both. Other than that, I have no idea why anyone even mentions the equivalent FOV which I believe the OP was doing.

Yes 17 is 17 is 17mm.

I don't know why I mention it, except that a full frame shooter might weigh in on the matter, but it is fairly irrelevant. I think everyone in this thread is clear about focal length, crop sensors, ect.

Thanks for all the help so far.

Read kmk's post.

Maybe we aren't on the same page, but all else being equal putting a 50mm lens on a full frame and a crop will result in two different images. That's all I was getting at.

TeenPhotog wrote in post #11398778
Thanks for taking the time to read this.

So both have a constant max aperture of 2.8. A big subject for me is shooting concerts. I am on a 450d so the 17-50 becomes a 27.2-80 and the 28-75 a 44.8-120.

At concerts I have been exclusively using the 50 1.8. Roughly 80% of the time, when I wish that I had a zoom lens, I wish I could go wider, often times a lot wider. But there are those occasionally instances where I want I longer focal length.

At this point the 28-75 seems like the better choice. Is either lens more prone to flare? Is one generally sharper, especially when wide open? Any insight would be really helpful.

Thanks.

On a crop model the 17-50 will be sharper but will vignette on a full frame body

TeenPhotog wrote in post #11399935
Maybe we aren't on the same page, but all else being equal putting a 50mm lens on a full frame and a crop will result in two different images. That's all I was getting at.

right, you got to be careful here. The crop factor police will come down fast.

watt100 wrote in post #11400262
right, you got to be careful here. The crop factor police will come down fast.

You're definitely right about that...

Since getting my 17-50 my 28-75 has been used mainly for it's "macro" shooting abilities. The last wedding I shot my 17-50 and my 85 lived on the camera, only time they came off was when it was time to do detail/ring shots which is where the macro of the 28-75 really comes in handy.

Honestly that's the only reason I have the lens anymore, once I get a dedicated macro, I'm pretty sure that the 28-75 will be gone.

I'd say normally, the 17-50mm makes a better range. But in concert shooting, I'm assuming you are mainly going for portrait type of composition and in that case, I think the 28-75mm may be better.

I've had both lenses on a cropped body and found the 28-75mm lens better for half body to head shot shooting.