Canon Lenses Vs Tamron Lenses
Canon 17-55 mm f/2.8 IS vs Tamron 17-50 f/2.8?

after 6 months of research, I'm seriously considering buying the Canon 17-55 mm f / 2.8 I've seen great image samples via Internet. what worries me, though not incredibly high price that I pay for it, (if i get my money, I do not have a lot to pay a good lens), but reading all these stories on the Internet on the topics of flares, dust accumulation and the way the IS stops working after a while makes me think twice before spending a lot for something that will not last too long qualities. In this case, if I be better off with the equivalent Tamron know I will get better value for money? Can anyone be a master of both or one of these lenses share your thoughts on this?

Canon is a lens Tamron best quality. The problems are not as common as seen on the Internet. However, I suggest you purchase through the market right distributor gray. Turning to the samples the big picture you've seen over the Internet, the optics are obviously big in the objective two, but the beautiful images were made by photographers and not just by the lens. Do not suggest buying any of these lenses, even if you have money to burn. It is better to buy a standard 18-55mm lens. For me, the purchase of optics expensive for a crop sensor camera makes no sense. For more wide angle of 18 million (18-55) and then choose the Tokina wide angle zoom or something similar. 17mm no make much difference. The opening faster is helpful, but I prefer to buy a prime target faster than a zoom. To summarize – Canon Tamron is better than among two you have suggested. However, if I were you, I would have stayed away from them.