Tamron 17-35 or Tamron 17-50 for Canon XT

[rxl125]

Any experience with either? I have a 50 mm canon 1.8 lens, so I'll be ok if I go with the 17-35...

I can get the 17-35 200 cheaper.

 

[OreoCookie]

Any experience with either? I have a 50 mm canon 1.8, so I'll be ok if I go with the 17-35...

I can get the 17-35 200 cheaper.

I'd recommend the 17-50 lens, it'll be a lot more useful and you won't change lenses as often. The 17-35 is a left-over from the era when film cameras dominated the market; the corresponding lens in the dslr world has a focal length range of 10/12-22/24.

 

[rxl125]

The 17-35 Tamron SP AF17-35/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF) is a digital only lens, correct?

 

[OreoCookie]

The 17-35 Tamron SP AF17-35/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF) is a digital only lens, correct?

It also works on film cameras and FF sensors -- although I can't imagine that someone shells out $3k on a Canon 5D and then buys such a cheap lens.

My point is that this lens is mainly aimed at people with analog (read: film) bodies who also want to use it on their digital body. The `Di' moinker is marketing speech for `designed with digital cameras in mind'; usually that means it only works on dslrs.

However, my main argument remains: that particular focal range is definitely not appealing for someone with a dslr. Either take a 12-24 zoom or 17-50.

 

[rxl125]

got the 17-50 made in Japan... Wow, very nice...

Cha ching to my bank account though...