17-55 f-2.8 IS or 24-70 f2.8 L???

M

McNyat

Messages
493
Name
Ciaran
Edit My Images
Yes
Have been thinking for a loonnngg time now :thinking: and will prob take the plunge after christmas. Without going into what types of photos I take could some of you tell me which one you think is the is the best one, and why??? :shrug:

Thanks
 
17-55 any day of the week!
 
I've had both, only reason I sold the 17-55 was it would not fit my 1D, but on a crop camera the 17-55 over the 24-70, as Jim says "any day of the week"

Why, more suitable focal range on a crop, IS, and maybe sharper images.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Like mentioned, depends if you'll change body in the future as ef-s fit doesnt fit 1D 's etc..

As your looking at a 24-70 look at the 28-70 2.8L instead..(The older version) not as wide, but better colours/contrast and its sharper too.. Save yourself a couple of pennies too :)
 
Mr. Fish said:
Like mentioned, depends if you'll change body in the future as ef-s fit doesnt fit 1D 's etc..
Click to expand...

Most people don't know if they are going to change to FF in the future and most never do anyway. So unless one does know then why buy the less suitable lens based on the possibility of something maybe happening in the future. Get the 17-55, if looked after it will retain good resale value. :thumbs:
 
If you think you might one day want to beat someone to death with your lens and still take pictures with it afterwards, then the 24-70 is a clear favourite. It has much better build quality than then 17-55. I wouldn't want to take on someone armed with an old-school Nikon lens (for example the Nikon 135mm f/2 DC feels like it's carved from a solid block of metal), but it's definitely the weapon of choice amongst the Canon mid-range zooms.

But otherwise, the 17-55 is comparable optically, has a more useful focal length range, and has IS. Simples!
 
It all depends on which focal range best suits you. There are no magic ranges for APS-C or FF cameras. Many like the extra width of the 17-55. I found that I needed the extra length of the 24-70 for shooting my friend and her horse.
 
McNyat said:
Thanks to all of you for your advice. I was deffo leaning towards the 17-55 but the IS motor problems that are mentioned on the attached thread have made me think again????? Is this really a widespread problem?????
Click to expand...

Also, someone told me that the 24-70 2.8L lens doesnt need image stabalisation due to the wide apperture that it has. What do you think of this, is that a fair comment??? :help::thinking::shrug:
 
McNyat said:
Also, someone told me that the 24-70 2.8L lens doesnt need image stabalisation due to the wide apperture that it has. What do you think of this, is that a fair comment??? :help::thinking::shrug:
Click to expand...

They both have the same aperture. Some people love having IS, some are not bothered. It does have its uses but is not really a deal breaker on those focal lengths imo.
 
I've had both - and both are cracking lenses...

On my cropped body the 17-55 was a great choice.. On my full frame body the 24-70 also performed superbly.

If you're sticking with your current body for a while - go for the 17-55...

I'm not sure that failing motors are that common a problem. I never had any issues personally and used it a lot...
 
hollis_f said:
It all depends on which focal range best suits you. There are no magic ranges for APS-C or FF cameras. Many like the extra width of the 17-55. I found that I needed the extra length of the 24-70 for shooting my friend and her horse.
Click to expand...

I agree with this totally. I have a Sigma 18-50mm and I find it to be a great walk around, however the 24-70mm focal length on a crop would be better for portraits as it would be equivelant to 38-112mm.

My personal opinion is, why pay all the additional money for the additional glass that you are not going to use on a crop? There are EF-S lenses that will more than do the job!
 
McNyat said:
Thanks to all of you for your advice. I was deffo leaning towards the 17-55 but the IS motor problems that are mentioned on the attached thread have made me think again????? Is this really a widespread problem?????
Click to expand...

I had read about these problems too and to be honest, that coupled with build quality (IS failures, dust) of the 17-55 for the cost (no hood, no bag) has what has held me back thus far. I have read about sharpness issues and quality issues with the current 24-70L. So from all reviews out there the general consensus is the 17-55 seems the better lens for the crop (I also want USM and FTM which the equivalent but cheaper Sigma and Tamrons don't have.)

Ideally I would prefer the lens that might never appear, the 24-70mkII if it was optically as good as the 70-200mkII and would pay accordingly. I have the 10-22 already so the wide end covered.

Obviously if you need weather/environmental sealing, the range upto 70mm or use on a full frame then the 17-55 is not the one to get.

If you are set on the 17-55 and don't mind a 'grey' important...HDEW have the best price at the moment at £690 free delivery just down from £739. There might be even cheaper ticket prices but be aware of import duty/vat and supplier reputation.

http://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/canon-ef-s-17-55mm-f28-is-usm-547-p.asp
 
McNyat said:
I was deffo leaning towards the 17-55 but the IS motor problems that are mentioned on the attached thread have made me think again????? Is this really a widespread problem?????
Click to expand...

I think I probably have more 17-55s than most people here (I currently have 10 of them). I haven't noticed a particular problem with the IS.

POAH said:
24-70 is not blessed with great QA
Click to expand...

I think I probably have more 24-70s than most people here (I currently have 15 of them). I haven't noticed a particular problem with QA.
 
StewartR said:
I think I probably have more 17-55s than most people here (I currently have 10 of them). I haven't noticed a particular problem with the IS.

I think I probably have more 24-70s than most people here (I currently have 15 of them). I haven't noticed a particular problem with QA.
Click to expand...

24-70s are surprisingly not as well built as you my think. many have had decentering problems, focus accuracy and softness.

some people might not notice some might.

I'm not saying all are bad but there are a fair few that are. you'll hear more about a problem in a lens than a great copy.
 
StewartR said:
I think I probably have more 24-70s than most people here (I currently have 15 of them). I haven't noticed a particular problem with QA.
Click to expand...

POAH said:
I'm not saying all are bad but there are a fair few that are.
Click to expand...

And your evidence for this is.....??

I think I'm much more likely to believe Stewart. Not only does he own 15 of them, but those 15 will be regularly checked out for performance.
 
hollis_f said:
And your evidence for this is.....??

I think I'm much more likely to believe Stewart. Not only does he own 15 of them, but those 15 will be regularly checked out for performance.
Click to expand...

I've 24-70 & would love to see proof in these claims too!
 
StewartR said:
I think I probably have more 17-55s than most people here (I currently have 10 of them). I haven't noticed a particular problem with the IS.

I think I probably have more 24-70s than most people here (I currently have 15 of them). I haven't noticed a particular problem with QA.
Click to expand...

Why would you need so many of one lens?... Suspicious
 
duttytd said:
Why would you need so many of one lens?... Suspicious
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's dead suspicious. I also have 30 Canon 100-400s and about 40 assorted 70-200s, amongst other things.

Check out the signature in my earlier post (#8 in this thread).
:D
 
I must admit I've been researching this lens recently and haven't come across any.
Got any links to the bad ones?
 
pickled said:
I must admit I've been researching this lens recently and haven't come across any.
Got any links to the bad ones?
Click to expand...

see that's the problem there is no such thing as a lens lol
 
Loved my 17-55. Only reason I no longer use it and have now sold it is because I went FF.

Lovely lens.
 
I loved my 17-55mm IS. That was until it was stolen on Saturday, alongside my 70-200mm F/4 IS, 10-22mm, 430EX II and all the other gubbins in my kitbag.

Now I am left with just the 7D and and 135mm L that I was carrying when the bag disappeared.

Out of everything I have lost, the 17-55mm will being replaced first. The rest I need to start saving for as my personal insurance only covers camera gear up to £500. Why oh why did I take all of my kit to my son's 7th Birthay party? The bag was left with a group of friends, but someone still managed to nab it without being seen.
 
Orville said:
I loved my 17-55mm IS. That was until it was stolen on Saturday, alongside my 70-200mm F/4 IS, 10-22mm, 430EX II and all the other gubbins in my kitbag.

Now I am left with just the 7D and and 135mm L that I was carrying when the bag disappeared.

Out of everything I have lost, the 17-55mm will being replaced first. The rest I need to start saving for as my personal insurance only covers camera gear up to £500. Why oh why did I take all of my kit to my son's 7th Birthay party? The bag was left with a group of friends, but someone still managed to nab it without being seen.
Click to expand...

That's awful, and at a kids birthday party as well :-(

Good luck with replacing your gear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top