I've been eyeing the 17-28 for that exact reason. Gimbal balancing much easier with an internal zoomI think I would of preferred a fix barrel lens. If it was fixed barrel, it'd be a perfect match up to the fix barrel Tamron 17-28mm 2.8 lens! I have all non-extendable zooms and primes only!
I've also heard from the webs that barrel extending zooms will always suffer from more dust due to how they operate. Since reading hat I've been trying to keep that in my head when researching new glassI always wondered why someone would care about non-extending zooms, now I understand, thanks.
Depends on the design, I guess. I use my FE 4/24-70 a lot, it extends a lot and I have no dust issues on or in the lens. Same for the FE 4/16-35; the Voigtländer FE 1.2/40 had a clearly visible dust speck almost from day 1. Water and dust resistant lenses should be at an advantage here.I've also heard from the webs that barrel extending zooms will always suffer from more dust due to how they operate. Since reading hat I've been trying to keep that in my head when researching new glass
And how has the Tamron 17-28 worked out for you - optically and focal-range-wise? I ask because I have the Sony 16-35 f/4 and I am thinking about making the swap.That's why I sold my Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f/4. Optically I had no problem with it, but having to extend at the wide end was always an annoyance.