July 22, 2014, 05:50:38 AM

Author Topic: Canon 16-35 vs Tamron 17-50  (Read 6457 times)

Policar

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 375
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 16-35 vs Tamron 17-50
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2012, 04:57:30 PM »
My 17-55mm IS is mighty sharp wide open (for what it is), but the amount of falloff and CA is just staggering.  Is this lens just not that good or might I have a bad sample?  The bokeh is ugly, too, but what can you expect?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 16-35 vs Tamron 17-50
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2012, 04:57:30 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13506
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 16-35 vs Tamron 17-50
« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2012, 05:21:48 PM »
My 17-55mm IS is mighty sharp wide open (for what it is), but the amount of falloff and CA is just staggering. 

Mine is also quite sharp, the vignetting is obvious but comparatively not bad (the comparators being several L lenses on FF - the 35L, 85L II, 24-105 @ 24mm and 16-35 II @ 16mm wide open all show more vignetting than the 17-55mm).  The CA is pretty mild, IMO. 
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Cornershot

  • Guest
Re: Canon 16-35 vs Tamron 17-50
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2012, 05:41:02 PM »
I have the 16-35mm and love it. It's not perfect but it is better than the Tamron, which I also owned and sold. The Canon has better low light focusing than the Tamron, which tends to hunt around more. And the Canon is so much quieter. The Tamron is good for the price but pretty noisy. If only they'd put some kind of USM in that lens.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 16-35 vs Tamron 17-50
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2012, 05:41:02 PM »