A&P What should I replace my Tamron 17-50 with?

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by k1d., May 4, 2009.

  1. k1d.

    k1d. New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    IMPERIAL
    Thinking about replacing my Tamron 17-50 with a new lenses...
    It'll be probably my only lenses and it'll be going on my 40D...

    I was looking at the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens..
    Any suggestions?

    Reasons why I wanna replace or thinking about replacing the Tamron...
    Loud/Makes a bunch of noise when focusing..
    Focusing seems slow :o
     
  2. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    I'm just curious... why is focusing noise (minimal) so damned important for most of you guys?
     
  3. wizeguy4

    wizeguy4 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allentown, PA
    gear whores :naughty:

    I have the 15-55 f2.8 and it is not the reduced noise you should get it for, It is for the incredible speed it focuses and the sharpness of the photos it produces and you also get that extra 5mm
     
  4. The_Eagle_Has_Landed

    The_Eagle_Has_Landed New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,371
    Likes Received:
    0
    because when they are shooting hot models it fucks up the mood
     
  5. k1d.

    k1d. New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    IMPERIAL
    yeah the biggest nuisance for me is how slow it takes to focus.. i was messing with my uncles lenses.. and shit it was focusing in like a instant.
    then was shooting with my tamron and i was so sad.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2009
  6. wizeguy4

    wizeguy4 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allentown, PA
    I know what you mean. I had the sigma 18-200 lens and I ended up after a series of buy and bargains and trades of getting the 17-55 IS and the 70-20 f4 IS. I dont see myself ever wanting a lens that does not have USM.
     
  7. Drunken Karnie Midget

    Drunken Karnie Midget In Yeo We Trust, All Others Pay Cash OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    39,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Dirty Canada
    ok... good enough. It just seems to come up everytime someone's talkin about getting new glass. :hsugh:
     
  8. Smeghead

    Smeghead New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Klingonlandia
    That Tamron lens is pretty damn good though, amirite? :cool:
     
  9. MSIGuy

    MSIGuy om nom nom nom!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    4,724
    Likes Received:
    0
    You can replace it with my Tamron 28-75... Wanna trade? lol
     
  10. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    16-35L, 17-40L. Nothing else out there worth the change.
     
  11. k1d.

    k1d. New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    IMPERIAL
    Even if it would be my only lenses choice for awhile?
    Pretty much will be my main and only walk around lense.
     
  12. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you're going to sell a $400 lens for about $350 and pick up a $1000 lens all because of the focus noise and supposed slow focusing? Just say it, you're a gear whore.

    I used to shoot fast action all the time and never found the "slowness" of our non-USM lenses to be an issue.
     
  13. k1d.

    k1d. New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    IMPERIAL
    I wont deny it that I'm probably a gear whore for whatever hobby I'm in.. it kinda sucks.... thats why I'm asking for everyone's insight... So lets throw a bunch of IFs..
    Lets say if I had the cash and if I wanted to upgraded my lenses... should I stay in pretty much the same focal range and everything and upgrade my Tamron 17-50 to the Canon 17-55? Or should I be looking at a different lenses or should I not be thinking about upgrading at all.

    Thanks
     
  14. tetsuo

    tetsuo And shepherds we shall be...

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    Messages:
    9,444
    Likes Received:
    0
    personally, i would get a 2nd lens before making that upgrade, then again i've never used the 17-55 :o
     
  15. ok_computer

    ok_computer OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,615
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB, Canada

    :werd: The 17-55 IS build quality is stunningly shitty for the price they ask., It's like the 17-85
     
  16. Jbrown

    Jbrown OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    44,498
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Dallas
    But has awesome IQ
     
  17. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just don't see why someone would do this unless it's about about what gear you have instead of what gear you need.

    I'd rather get another lens to fulfill the arsenal rather than spend money to up 5mm on the long end and get a quieter focus...not worth it.
     

Share This Page