24-70 2.8 / 17-35 2.8

[oreo5000]

Hi Guys,
I have a D700 and a 24-70 2.8. I love it.
However, I seem to be using mostly the 24 end and sometimes wish it was slightly wider. I just wondered what you guys who have experience with both lenses thought of replacing my 24-70 with a 17-35 f2.8?
Thanks for your time

 

[EdBray]

I have a 5D2 and I have the Canon version of the 24-70 f2.8, for my wider stuff I have a choice of either the 17-40L or a Sigma 12-24. I tend to use the 17-40L on my 30D as a standard zoom, and if I need wider than 24mm on the 5D2 then I take the Sigma, you can't get much wider than 12mm (rectilinear) on FF.

 

[puddleduck]

Well I've got both lenses.

The 24-70 is sharper wide open, although 24mm is its weak point, where the 17-35 is very strong. I've found this typical on the 3 24-70's I've used.

I don't see the 17-35 as a wide open lens though. its only "OK", and improves a lot at f/4. The 24-70 is sharp wide open.

The 17-35 is stronger wider - 17mm is just superb, 35mm is getting a little weaker.

In a nutshell, if you want to shoot wide open, then the 24-70 is a better choice from 24-35mm. If you will be shooting stoped down for landscapes, the 17-35 is probably a better choice. Obviously if you need 17 to 23mm your choice is clear.

 

[Merovingian]

So for sharp, wide landscapes, the 17-35 is your man then?

Presumably it's an old lens - doesn't seem to get much mention?

 

[Wail]

I believe the 17-35 f/2.8 is discontinued.

There is one for sale, 2nd hand in the For Sale forum here.