Mid range lenses, deciding between 2?

I upgraded my non IS kit lens to the 18-55 IS version and just having the IS makes it a lot more usable. Its only a really cheap upgrade but it gave me loads more sharp pics than before so well worth it.
 
I agree with Rojin - the Tamron 17-50 non VC would be a worthy upgrade to the kit lens. The IS version of the kit lens is apparently a significant improvement over the Tamron, but I do find mine to lack the IQ that I'd like at times - the Tamron excels in this area and offers f2.8 as well.

I take it you mean the Canon 17-55 IS f2.8 rather than the kit 18-55 IS? It's also much more expensive. I'm not convinced IQ is significantly better although I did like the faster/quieter AF. Up to now most of my subjects have been moving so I haven't found much use for IS at this focal length.
 
I take it you mean the Canon 17-55 IS f2.8 rather than the kit 18-55 IS? It's also much more expensive. I'm not convinced IQ is significantly better although I did like the faster/quieter AF. Up to now most of my subjects have been moving so I haven't found much use for IS at this focal length.

Bah, kids talking to me when I was posting and I got my lenses all mixed up! :D

Was meant to say that the 18-55 IS is a significant improvement from the non-IS version. Serves me right to not pay full attention to what I'm writing! :rolleyes:

From everything I've read, the Tamron IQ is right up there, almost with the 17-55 IS - hence me thinking that the Tamron would be a good choice. I certainly want to change my 18-55 IS to the Tamron at some point!
 
Back
Top Bottom