24-105 - swap for 17-55 f2.8.... would you?

barbs

barbs

Messages
275
Name
Kieran
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a 24-105 and love it.... it is on my 7d all the time, but I still find myself craving the f2.8 that I used to have (a Tamron 28-75). Despite the superb IQ I miss the low light ability of f2.8.

As the title states the question is, would you swap the 24-105 for a 17-55 f2.8?

As it is for a 7d (and this is unlikely to change) the 17-55 efs will work fine. The obvious difference in focal length is manageable for me.

I guess the answer is to find more funds and go for the 24-70, but what would you do?
 
Last edited:
17-55 f/2.8 anyday!
 
On the 7D I would personally go for the 17-55 IS as I like a bit of wideness, the 24-70L doesn't have IS so if that is an issue and you want f2.8 then your stuck with the 17-55, if you are not bothered about IS but want weatherproofing then the 24-70L is your baby. Depends what you shoot and what you need along with the f2.8
 
Thanks for the replies....

I mainly shot people, kids .. indoors and prefer not to use the flash or studio lights if I can avoid it. Natural light always works best for me, which is the reason for the low light requirement.

IS is nice, but not essential on this focal length. TBH I am strongly leaning towards the 17-55 f2.8.

Ed - I also think that the extra 7 mm might be useful indoors... I'd miss the reach though but I can always used the 70-200 if I need it.

I might just see is anyone is interested in swap for the 24-105 in the classifieds.
 
Just a thought (a dangerous thing) ... but would I be better keeping the 24-105 and getting a nifty fifty?

Decision, decisions.... it just sort of feels wrong parting with a piece of L glass!
 
I think I'd hang onto the 24-105 for now, its such a useful walkabout lens and good for outside portraits etc, grab a 50mm F1.8 to cover the indoor shots (cheap as chips but fantastic results) and then think about saving for the 17-55 IS.

Alternatively you could grab a Tamron non VC 17-50mm F2.8 for now, but even then I would still go for the 50mm F1.8 as well .. F1.8 & F2 are really handy indoors and in low light as well as for throwing the background out of focus when shooting portraits.
 
Thanks.. I have already had 2 x 50mm f1.8s in the past. One I broke in two and the other was never used as I had a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 on the camera all the time. I suppose that is why I discounted the 50mm 1.8 originally.... but it is a cheap experiment and easily sold on if it does not work.
 
Last edited:
barbs said:
Just a thought (a dangerous thing) ... but would I be better keeping the 24-105 and getting a nifty fifty?

Decision, decisions.... it just sort of feels wrong parting with a piece of L glass!
Click to expand...

I own a 24-105 and would never get rid of it. Imo it is the best purchase I have ever made. I think the nifty fifty would be a sensible compromise and keep the 24-105 for the extra reach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top