# Replacement for Tamron 17-55mm f/2.8?



## thepancakeman (Dec 28, 2011)

So our Tamron 17-55mm f/2.8 just died. That leaves us with the 24mm on our 24-105 L as the widest we currently have and that's just not going to cut it, so I'm looking for suggestions. We currently have only APS-C bodies, but in general are trying to stay away from EF-S lenses becuase good glass is expensive and I don't want to see that $ left behind when we add a FF body.

Things I'm looking for:

Fast (nothing slower than 2.8 )
Prefer zoom over prime, but that's not an absolute
Not EF-S
Relatively inexpensive (good glass is never cheap, but some is more affordable than others)
17mm minimum, wider probably even better

Thoughts? Thanks!


----------



## katwil (Dec 28, 2011)

Your specs have really boxed you into a 16-35 f/2.8L in the Canon product line. As you probably know, that’s a $1,400 lens. With the 5D II running at around $2,000, might this be the time to jump to FF? 17mm on your 40D is equivalent to 27 on FF, so your 24-105 would actually be wider than what you’ve been shooting with.


----------



## NoWii (Dec 28, 2011)

Well, It's a bit of a problem to find such a lens. It needs to be wide on a crop senzor, but ready for fullframe. And not slower than 2.8. If I recall correctly, the only lens that meets all your requirements is Canon 16-35 2.8L. But it's not exactly cheap..
By the way, how did tamron 17-55 work for you? I'm thinking of buying it for concert photography. Recommended (yes/no)?


----------



## smirkypants (Dec 28, 2011)

Buy the Canon 17-55/2.8. In many ways it's the perfect lens. Fast, advanced image stabilization, great image quality. Everyone loves this lens. The only downsides are that it's EF-S and that it's not weather sealed. Other than that, it's nearly flawless. 

If you decide to upgrade to FF, you'll get about 90% of your money back selling it on eBay. It sells for $1000 on Amazon and usually around $900 on eBay used. If you don't upgrade to FF you have the lens that solves all of your problems. If you do upgrade, you had a $100-$150 rental.


----------



## handsomerob (Dec 28, 2011)

smirkypants said:


> Buy the Canon 17-55/2.8. In many ways it's the perfect lens. Fast, advanced image stabilization, great image quality. Everyone loves this lens. The only downsides are that it's EF-S and that it's not weather sealed. Other than that, it's nearly flawless.
> 
> If you decide to upgrade to FF, you'll get about 90% of your money back selling it on eBay. It sells for $1000 on Amazon and usually around $900 on eBay used. If you don't upgrade to FF you have the lens that solves all of your problems. If you do upgrade, you had a $100-$150 rental.



+1. 

17-55mm f/2.8 is the only real answer to your needs *at this moment*. Go get your great shots *now* and worry about the future later  

And indeed, like any quality glass, it will keep it's value quite well when you decide to upgrade to FF, so you won't lose much money.


----------



## pdirestajr (Dec 28, 2011)

You could always go with the Samyang 14mm f2.8 lens. It's full frame, super wide and affordable... Just manual focus.

But at that wide, focus is pretty easy. There's a little distortion too, but easily fixed in post.


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Dec 28, 2011)

I would recommend checking out the Sigma 17-50 2.8 stablilized lens. I had one for about a month. I loved the size, sharpness and build quality. Unfortunately it had strange focus problems with my 7D (which is currently at Canon repair because it also has strange focus problems with the Canon equivalent lens.)

In any case, be sure you buy your lens at a place where you can return it. And if you buy from a brick and mortar store, see if you can do some testing in the store before you take it home.


----------



## raz (Dec 28, 2011)

My Tamron just died yesterday as well and am strongly considering the 17-55 Canon 2.8. what are the chances of a new one being released next week? I haven't seen much in the rumor dept. about this lens other than a potential patent being filed for one (f2?) that may or may not have been confirmed. Unless I'm mistaking that for something else? Help is appreciated - I'd like to order this ASAP so I can get a tax credit for my 2011 return. THANKS!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 28, 2011)

raz said:


> My Tamron just died yesterday as well and am strongly considering the 17-55 Canon 2.8. what are the chances of a new one being released next week? I haven't seen much in the rumor dept. about this lens other than a potential patent being filed for one (f2?) that may or may not have been confirmed. Unless I'm mistaking that for something else? Help is appreciated - I'd like to order this ASAP so I can get a tax credit for my 2011 return. THANKS!



You're correct about the f/2 patent, but I don't that will see the light of day as a product - if it does, it will be very heavy and _very_ expsnsive. 

I don't expect an update to the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS any time soon. It performs very well, and IMO is the best general purpose zoom for an APS-C body.


----------



## handsomerob (Dec 28, 2011)

raz said:


> *My Tamron just died yesterday as well* and am strongly considering the 17-55 Canon 2.8. what are the chances of a new one being released next week? I haven't seen much in the rumor dept. about this lens other than a potential patent being filed for one (f2?) that may or may not have been confirmed. Unless I'm mistaking that for something else? Help is appreciated - I'd like to order this ASAP so I can get a tax credit for my 2011 return. THANKS!



Hmm why are all the Tamrons dying??  

I think the rumor was that the 17-55mm f/2.8 could be replaced by a 15-60mm f/2.8 (still EF-S). Not sure if it will ever come true and no idea when... 

f/2 version of such EF-S lens sounds unlikely to me since it would cost more than any current APS-C body. So not really something a regular crop user would pay for.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 28, 2011)

Here's the CR article on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2 IS:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/canon-ef-s-17-55-f2-is-patent/

I do recall a 15-60 rumor as well.


----------



## handsomerob (Dec 28, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Here's the CR article on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2 IS:
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/canon-ef-s-17-55-f2-is-patent/
> 
> I do recall a 15-60 rumor as well.



Thx neuro. I don't understand why would they release such lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 28, 2011)

handsomerob said:


> Thx neuro. I don't understand why would they release such lens.



I doubt they ever will. Many patents are filed with no intention of turning them into products, but rather to restrict the R&D efforts of competitors by restricting the IP and freedom to operate.


----------



## handsomerob (Dec 28, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> handsomerob said:
> 
> 
> > Thx neuro. I don't understand why would they release such lens.
> ...



You're right, that makes a lot of sense


----------



## smirkypants (Dec 28, 2011)

Are you kidding? How does this not make sense? A 17-55 2.0 that performs a full stop better than the current 17-55? Sign me up now!


----------



## raz (Dec 28, 2011)

thanks, everyone. I ordered it and it should be here Friday! Honestly, I think my Tamron just got banged around one too many times. Can anyone recommend a good 77mm filter for primarily protection purposes? I know everyone says multi-coated. would this be a good choice? Anything cheaper available? Thanks! 

http://www.amazon.com/Hoya-Digital-Multi-Coated-Frame-Filter/dp/B00009R9EO/ref=sr_1_8?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1325109026&sr=1-8

or this? 

http://www.amazon.com/77mm-Clear-Haze-Single-Coating/dp/B000MVF1LA/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1325109394&sr=1-3


----------



## Meh (Dec 28, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> handsomerob said:
> 
> 
> > Thx neuro. I don't understand why would they release such lens.
> ...



Even more specifically, R&D efforts to design improved versions of any given lens may result in several new lens designs that, upon testing, turn out to be no better (or slightly worse or only slightly better) than the existing lens and therefore not worth putting into production. But, the work is done so Canon might file the patent to prevent say Sigma from coming up with that design and selling it at a lower price point.


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 28, 2011)

thepancakeman said:


> So our Tamron 17-55mm f/2.8 just died. That leaves us with the 24mm on our 24-105 L as the widest we currently have and that's just not going to cut it, so I'm looking for suggestions. We currently have only APS-C bodies, but in general are trying to stay away from EF-S lenses becuase good glass is expensive and I don't want to see that $ left behind when we add a FF body.
> 
> Things I'm looking for:
> 
> ...



Given your requirements there can be only 1
the 16-35 f2.8L II it is a fantastic lens and one of my favourites I actually prefer to use it on my 1D3 with the APS-H sensor dont get me wrong its still fantastic on FF but on the crop it makes a brilliant walk around lens I havent used it on a 1.6 crop yet I'll have to try it out but I am sure the quality will be stellar aswell.


----------



## thepancakeman (Dec 29, 2011)

katwil said:


> Your specs have really boxed you into a 16-35 f/2.8L in the Canon product line. As you probably know, that’s a $1,400 lens. With the 5D II running at around $2,000, might this be the time to jump to FF? 17mm on your 40D is equivalent to 27 on FF, so your 24-105 would actually be wider than what you’ve been shooting with.



The 16-35 definitely looks like a sweet lens. However, the fact that it's a big chunk of the cost of the 5d2 which pulls the 24-105 into about the same range is a very good (and dangerous to my pocketbook) observation. I will have to ponder! +1 for the suggestion--thanks!


----------



## thepancakeman (Dec 29, 2011)

NoWii said:


> By the way, how did tamron 17-55 work for you? I'm thinking of buying it for concert photography. Recommended (yes/no)?



It really didn't get much use. Neither my wife or I shoot wide very often (planning to change that), and the IQ just didn't compare to the 24-105. Which of course makes it that much more disappointing that it failed after probably less than a couple hundred photos (in 5ish years).


----------



## koolman (Dec 29, 2011)

thepancakeman said:


> So our Tamron 17-55mm f/2.8 just died. That leaves us with the 24mm on our 24-105 L as the widest we currently have and that's just not going to cut it, so I'm looking for suggestions. We currently have only APS-C bodies, but in general are trying to stay away from EF-S lenses becuase good glass is expensive and I don't want to see that $ left behind when we add a FF body.
> 
> Things I'm looking for:
> 
> ...



I have a 550d and use the Tammy 17-50 NON VC lens. In my opinion a better option then the canon 17-55 (which I tried and returned) The Tammy is smaller, lighter, and IMO just as sharp if not sharper.

I found the canon build quite mediocre. I also found the AF somewhat inconsistent - this really surprising taking into account the price of the lens.

I would just get another Tammy.

Additionally - I use the samyang 14mm (just got one a few weeks ago). Its manual focus, but for such a wide lens, you can just use the hyper focal point of focus. The samyang is very sharp and gives great colors.
Its also quite affordable.


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 29, 2011)

thepancakeman said:


> katwil said:
> 
> 
> > Your specs have really boxed you into a 16-35 f/2.8L in the Canon product line. As you probably know, that’s a $1,400 lens. With the 5D II running at around $2,000, might this be the time to jump to FF? 17mm on your 40D is equivalent to 27 on FF, so your 24-105 would actually be wider than what you’ve been shooting with.
> ...


the 24-105 is good dont get me wrong but the IQ of the 16-35 flat out destroys it however there is a massive zoom range difference and the matter of the 24-105 having IS and being a full stop slower you did specify f2.8 at the slowest


----------



## briansquibb (Dec 29, 2011)

wickidwombat said:


> the 24-105 is good dont get me wrong but the IQ of the 16-35 flat out destroys it however there is a massive zoom range difference and the matter of the 24-105 having IS and being a full stop slower you did specify f2.8 at the slowest



If speed is key with a minimum reach of 24mm then the obvious choice is the 24-70 f/2.8

However a blue sky approach might be to choose some fast primes such as a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm

Just a thought


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Jan 7, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> Are you kidding? How does this not make sense? A 17-55 2.0 that performs a full stop better than the current 17-55? Sign me up now!


Judging by the way Canon builds f2.8 zoom lenses, you would need some sort of cart to haul it around. Maybe they could just add a pair wheels and a couple of rear bipod legs so you could deploy it like a small howitzer. LOL


----------



## Tijn (Jan 18, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Here's the CR article on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2 IS:
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/canon-ef-s-17-55-f2-is-patent/
> 
> I do recall a 15-60 rumor as well.



With the new C300 release and one of its announced lenses being a 14.5 - 60mm lens (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/839223-REG/Canon_6141B002_CN_E_14_5_60mm_T2_6_L.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296), is there a chance that this 15-60 rumour was in fact not about a 17-55 f/2.8 replacement, but about the being developed C300 lens?

Also, what are your thoughts on how likely it is that an upgrade to the 17-55 f/2.8 will be released any time soon (i.e. this year)? It's a good lens, it costs a lot of money, people still pay for it; but its build quality is lacking for many photographers, and it's not weather resistant. An upgrade would be quite popular, but is it urgent?
I'd wet myself if they made it their first weathersealed (better build quality) EF-s lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 18, 2012)

Tijn said:


> Also, what are your thoughts on how likely it is that an upgrade to the 17-55 f/2.8 will be released any time soon (i.e. this year)? It's a good lens, it costs a lot of money, people still pay for it; but its build quality is lacking for many photographers, and it's not weather resistant. An upgrade would be quite popular, but is it urgent?
> I'd wet myself if they made it their first weathersealed (better build quality) EF-s lens.



I think an update to the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is pretty unlikely in the near future. As for better build/weather sealing in an EF-S lens, I suspect that depends mostly on what they do with their pro body lineup. They just merged the 1D and 1Ds lines into a FF camera, eliminating the 1.3x crop from the pro line. It may be that there's an outcry over that, and if Canon can sufficiently improve the IQ of an APS-C sensor, they may release a pro-level APS-C body (1D X-type AF and 1-series body design). If they do that, I think it's possible they'll release a weather-sealed EF-S lens. But which one(s)? The 17-55mm is a likely candidate, although there's already the 16-35mm f/2.8 (maybe add IS to that?). What they'd really need for a pro APS-C body would be a UWA zoom like the 10-22mm, since there's no sealed rectilinear lens in that range for APS-C.


----------



## Tijn (Jan 18, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> I think an update to the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is pretty unlikely in the near future. As for better build/weather sealing in an EF-S lens, I suspect that depends mostly on what they do with their pro body lineup. They just merged the 1D and 1Ds lines into a FF camera, eliminating the 1.3x crop from the pro line. It may be that there's an outcry over that, and if Canon can sufficiently improve the IQ of an APS-C sensor, they may release a pro-level APS-C body (1D X-type AF and 1-series body design). If they do that, I think it's possible they'll release a weather-sealed EF-S lens. But which one(s)? The 17-55mm is a likely candidate, although there's already the 16-35mm f/2.8 (maybe add IS to that?). What they'd really need for a pro APS-C body would be a UWA zoom like the 10-22mm, since there's no sealed rectilinear lens in that range for APS-C.



Thanks for your input. Could you perhaps briefly say how you think this fits in with both 60D and 7D bodies already being weather sealed? Provided that they do make good EF-lenses (such as this one, the 17-55 f/2.8 ), and they do already make the associated bodies weathersealed (60D, 7D), why would they not make their top EF-s lenses weathersealed as well? The bodies aren't "professional" (though 7D is commonly used by professional photographers, especially in sports or supertele range), but they're weathersealed. Why would a weathersealed EF-s lens require a new pro crop body?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 18, 2012)

Tijn said:


> Provided that they do make good EF-lenses (such as this one, the 17-55 f/2.8 ), and they do already make the associated bodies weathersealed (60D, 7D), why would they not make their top EF-s lenses weathersealed as well?



The level of sealing varies across the bodies, with the 1-series >> 7D > 5DII = 50D = 60D. "_Canon considers the weather resistance of the EOS 7D to be slightly better than the EOS 5D Mark II and 50D cameras, but not as robust as the EOS-1D series._" (Chuck Westfall, Canon USA)

Also, currently only L-series lenses are sealed, and not even all of them. I suspect Canon may want to keep that association, although releasing a pro APS-C body may present them with a nomenclature problem, since L lenses are all EF and will likely stay that way. But, they put a green ring around the DO lenses, so why not blue or magenta or whatever to denote L-type EF-S lenses.


----------



## bvukich (Jan 18, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tijn said:
> 
> 
> > Provided that they do make good EF-lenses (such as this one, the 17-55 f/2.8 ), and they do already make the associated bodies weathersealed (60D, 7D), why would they not make their top EF-s lenses weathersealed as well?
> ...



I would like to see some lenses that span focal lengths that make sense for both FF and crop (at the wide end obviously). Being an "L" would be a bonus.

How cool would an EF 15-70/f4L IS be? Make it a similar build, optical quality, and price to the 24-105/4L IS. I can see it not being spectacular on the wide end due to the price point, but no worse than the 24-105 on overlapping focal lengths, and more modern IS should make it a winner. I think it would be an awesome kit lens for "pro" (7D) crop bodies, and an easy up-sell or upgrade for prosumer xxD buyers.


----------



## Tijn (Jan 18, 2012)

On the topic of a weather sealed EF-s lens, note that for Nikon (Nikkor), the only DX lens that is weather sealed is in fact their 17-55 f/2.8. Compared to the Canon line-up history it would be surprising, but the same has gone for Nikon and they actually did it. Competition wise it wouldn't be a strange move, I'd think.


----------



## daltech (Jan 18, 2012)

How old is your Tamron ? It has a warranty of 6 years here in Canada ?

Bernard


----------

