This is an easy choice. The Canon lens would be my choice here.
A comparison of two wide-angle zoom lenses on the Camera Decision website: the Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4 Di OSD and the Canon EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM.
Based on the specs shown on the page, here is a comparison of their key features:
| Feature |
Tamron 17-35mm F2.8-4 Di OSD |
Canon EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM |
Difference / Advantage |
| Focal Range |
17-35mm |
17-40mm |
Canon has 5mm more Tele coverage |
| Max Aperture (Wide) |
F2.8-4 |
F4.0 |
Tamron has a wider aperture at the wide end |
| Optical Zoom Ratio |
2.1X |
2.4X |
Canon has more flexible focal coverage |
| Weight |
460g |
500g |
Tamron is 40g lighter |
| Length |
93mm |
97mm |
Tamron is 4mm shorter |
| Max Magnification |
0.2X |
0.24X |
Canon is better for close-up shots |
| Zoom Method |
Rotary (extending) |
Rotary (internal) |
Canon's length doesn't change during zooming |
| Distance/DoF Scale |
No |
Yes |
Canon has scales to assist focusing |
| Weather Sealing |
Yes |
Yes |
Same |
| Filter Thread |
77mm |
77mm |
Same |
The page also notes that both lenses are suitable for Travel, Walk Around, Vlogging, and Landscape photography.
A lens with a faster aperture is not essential for landscape photography. The only caveat being sunrise or sunset. You could get around this easily with a tripod or very steady hands. It's one stop of light at the wide end. It's just not enough to justify going third party. Although we don't have your budget, I would suggest that you also look at the EF 16-35 f4. This lens also comes in a constant f2.8 mk II or III. I owned the Mark II copy and used it frequently with my 6D Mark II. Lenses in this FL are great for landscapes.
~Rick
Bay Area - CA
~R5 C (1.1.2.1), ~R50v (1.1.1) ~RF Trinity, ~RF 100 Macro, ~RF 100~400, ~RF 100~500, ~RF 200-800 +RF 1.4x TC, BG-R10, 430EX III-RT ~DxO PhotoLab Elite ~DaVinci Resolve Studio ~ImageClass MF644Cdw/MF656Cdw ~Pixel 10 ~CarePaks Are Worth It
