canon 24-70 f/2.8 on a 7d

1.2f

1.2f

Messages
678
Edit My Images
Yes
anybody used the above lens on a 7d, been thinking of this lens as an alternative to the 17-55 f2.8 which seems to have a big question mark over it regarding its build quality.
 
on the whole i have heard the same regarding the 17-55 however, the build quality always seems to be remarked on. and i cant just be doing with stuff like that to be honest. also regarding width at 24 im not to concerned as i have my 10-22
 
From your lens lineup, you definitely like quality. Are you sure that you don't need lower light and greater bokeh from primes though?
 
tomqh said:
From your lens lineup, you definitely like quality. Are you sure that you don't need lower light and greater bokeh from primes though?
Click to expand...

hiya, for the sort of stuff i am using my camera for i'm pretty well served by the lenses i have although maybe in the future i will look into primes. still trying to get my head around this lot. lol

although i reckon i will get a 50mm f1.8 just to play around with its a reasonable price.
 
I do not own a 7D but I wish I would. I borrowed one for a day, it was great experience over the 30D I have. The 24-70L is a spectacular lens, it will not disappoint you! :) It is built like a tank, the AF is fast and the weight feels just right (this might be my very personal opinion).

Here is an example of the 24-70 on a 7D, for what I do this combination works really well. (I don't use wide angles that much)

Ioana by Oskars Lablaiks, on Flickr
 
You have a 10-22mm and you're thinking about getting a 50mm f1.8 and you question the build of the 17-55mm?

You could always buy two Tamron 17-50mm f2.8's just in case one breaks.
 
What's the big question over 17-55 f/2.8's build quality?, from what I've read and seen it's a superb lens. It's only missed out on the red ring by the lack of weather proofing and more likely it's an EF-S fit lens.

The only fault I've heard about quite often is the dust that can get behind the front element and and is a 10 minute home fix at that.
 
I had a 17-55 and ive had a 24-70, yes the build on the 24-70 is better. Its built like a tank but the 17-55 is no slouch either. When funds allow i'll be getting a 17-55 again, its certainly no worse than your 10-22 and light years ahead of your 50mm.
 
woof woof said:
You have a 10-22mm and you're thinking about getting a 50mm f1.8 and you question the build of the 17-55mm?

You could always buy two Tamron 17-50mm f2.8's just in case one breaks.
Click to expand...

Whats wrong with the build of the Canon 10-22?

Its a very well built lens.

EDIT - lol I forgot, you have a weird thing against the 10-22! :lol:
 
i'm new to photography and like most i presume base some of my thoughts/opinions etc. on reviews and other peoples experiences. i've never read a single bad word with respects to build quality on the 10-22mm. however, i've always come up against a comment regarding the build quality of the 17-55mm. apologies if i've offended anyone.
 
i doubt you have offended anyone mate.
 
I would suggest the 24-70 would be perfect. You have the 10-22 so wouldn't miss the wider range that the 17-55 would offer. You could always sell the 15-85 to help fund it. Plus the 24-70 and the 70-200 you already have are both EF so you can go full frame without the hassle of changing lenses.

I have one and love it. If you can afford it buy it !
 
odd jim said:
Whats wrong with the build of the Canon 10-22?

Its a very well built lens.

EDIT - lol I forgot, you have a weird thing against the 10-22! :lol:
Click to expand...

I haven't got anything against the 10-22mm apart from the fact that you can get a lens in the same range with less distortion and less light fall off. If you think that's wierd... I baffled. Anyway... I certainly don't have anything against the build quality as such.

My point was that the OP has an EF-S lens and should be familiar with the build. The 10-22mm is no way in the same league as the most robust L but it's good enough, as is the 17-55mm. Less said about the build of the 50mm f1.8 the better :naughty:
 
Last edited:
EF-S lenses are built as well if not better than most EF lenses. EF certainly doesn't always mean L!
 
I love my 24-70 on my 7d. It is my most used lens. Yeah its not that wide but I have other lenses for that. It's quite weighty at first but you soon get used to it. It's built like a tank and is pin Sharp. I just love it.
 
I'm in exactly the same boat except I already have the 17-55. Whilst the 17-55 is great, the build quality is adequate rather than superb and I wish it was weather-sealed.

The 24-70 would fix both of these issues but cost me IS. No matter how much I tell myself the 17-55 is fine, I still find myself lusting after the 24-70 :(
 
odd jim said:
EF-S lenses are built as well if not better than most EF lenses. EF certainly doesn't always mean L!
Click to expand...

Jim, if that post is aimed at me I did say that EF-S lenses are good enough.
 
woof woof said:
Jim, if that post is aimed at me I did say that EF-S lenses are good enough.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't aimed at you specifically, just a general point as some people forget that non L EF lenses arnt necessarily well put together (50mm mkII being a classic example) and if you think about the EF-S lenses now available the build and quality often exceeds that of the non L EF lenses, ie, 10-22, 15-85, 18-135, 60mm macro etc.

I still rate the 17-55 and apart from the dust issue I dont think there is a build issue with it.
 
Last edited:
1.2f said:
anybody used the above lens on a 7d, been thinking of this lens as an alternative to the 17-55 f2.8 which seems to have a big question mark over it regarding its build quality.
Click to expand...

what question mark?
 
I used the 24-70mm quite a lot when I had a crop camera and thought it was great. Nice to have that extra weather sealing too and know it'll work if you decide to go full frame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top