Replacement for Tamron 17-55mm f/2.8?

[koolman]

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!

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]

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!

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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

Bernard