Canon 17-85mm or Tamron 17-50

[sheridancarole]

I am dithering over this decision.
I'd like to start with just one zoom lens, less than $600 when I buy my XTI. (I already own an older Canon 100- 300mm from my Canon film camera)

I hope to use the new zoom as my primary lens - for all sorts of photos: travel, scenics, indoor family "snapshots", butterfly and flower "close ups" (but obviosuly not true macro.)

The Tamron 17-50mm is f2.8 across the entire zoom range- which is very appealing.

The Canon 17 - 85mm starts at f4 but has IS.
IF the IS allows me to handhold slower speeds for essentially a 2 stop difference - does that make it comparable to the Tamron.

Both have received good reviews, but is one lens considered "better" than the other?

The difference in cost is less than $100, so not too much of a factor.

Thanks for any comments/thoughts.:)

[forno]

I am going for a Tamron, for depth of field price and the fact that I beleive IS & f4 on a lens that is only a 85mm is a marketing ploy

160th of a second should be able to get you a handheld shot on an 85mm lens slower if you practise your technique

Plus some of the pics I have seen out of the Tamron are tip top:D

[forno]

Oh and I didnt see the need for the extra length ATM

[drew_viii]

go for tamron, canon 17-85 is a crappy lens and so expensive, not worth it at all! yes you do have IS, but f4? come on, you can't play with more depth of field with f4 while f2.8 can help you with depth of field and also faster shutter speed! no need for IS then right?