Beginner Lens Decisions for Canon 80D - 24-104 f4 vs 17-55 f2.8

R

robz

Messages
50
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
No
I'm in the market for a new lens and having a tough time deciding between two , after deciding not to buy the monster 150-600 that i was looking at (Thanks to all who contributed to that thread, but after trying one out, it was way too heavy)

I don't see myself upgrading to mirrorless any time soon , and if i do upgrade the body, it will likely be to a 90D so another APS-C / Crop Camera.

The two lenses i'm looking at , are the Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L , or , The the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 (Not L Series , and as far as i can tell, there's no Mk2 version of this)

The 24-105 is naturally more expensive coming in around £750 used, whilst the 17-55 comes in at around £400 used. I've been using my Sigma 35mm f/1.4 and 70-200 f/4 L for a couple of years now since upgrading from a 17-85 (Which doesn't work properly anymore)

Any thoughts or recommendations ? My concern is that using the 24-105 on a crop body is going to be a "waste" so to speak as i won't be able to get as wide a shot as if i were on full frame , but also concerned that the 17-55 won't perform as well overall.

TIA

EDIT : Formatting
 
The obvious thing with the 24-105mm is as you've already twigged you lose the wide end completely but you gain at the long end. So the first question for you is, is this what I want?

Back in my Canon days I had a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and as I remember there was a very similar Sigma 18-50mm f2.8. The Canon wasn't out at that time but when it came out the 3rd party lenses were cheaper and maybe as importantly smaller and lighter. That's possibly still the case. Another thing which I remember is that I read that the Canon 17-55mm f2.8 had its problems and was at one time Canon's most problem prone lens.

Good luck choosing but a standard zoom starting at an equiv of 38.4mm doesn't sound all that attractive to me (but maybe you like gaining at the other end?) so I'd be looking at the dedicated smaller, lighter and cheaper APS-C 17/18-50mm f2.8 options from Tamron and Sigma.
 
Another alternative to consider s/h is the Canon EF-s 15-85mm IS which is a decent lens but it is a slower lens in terms of aperture than f4. Sigma produce a17-50mm and a 17-70mm lens
 
Last edited:
Right so you still have 70-200 but nothing much wider than 24 so that would already be quite obvious what to do. 24-105 is not the sharpest lens, and on a high density sensor this will really show particularly at long end. IT will be nothing like 70-200. It's an OK all purpose maybe more video lens for something like 5D3 or R6 where you don't exceed 20MP resolution and don't print very large.
I have no idea about 17-55 and bare in mind there are similarly specced alternatives from the likes of Sigma
 
I had the 17-55 on my 80D when I was a Canon shooter. To be honest it was a brilliant lens, tack sharp and a really fast to focus.
Probably canons best lens for crop sensor bodies.
 
I use an EF-S 15-85mm on my 7DII and my wife has an EF-S 18-135mm nano USM on her 80D. Both very good in my view. Focusing on the 18-135mm is ridiculously fast. She also has an EF 70-300mm with Nano USM and that focuses ridiculously fast as well, quicker than my EF 100-400mm II.
 
I had the Canon 17-55 before I switched to Panasonic, excellent lens, very sharp and fast to focus. It was on my camera most of the time as it was so versatile. It is quite large and heavy compared to the Tamron 17-50 which I had before it, but it was worth the extra cost and weight for the image stabilisation and fast focus speed. Only issues I'm aware of is that they can be dust magnets and the IS can fail on older copies. Dust is easy to fix yourself, I cleaned mine a couple of times before I sold it.

I'd definitely pick the 17-55 over the 24-105 for a crop body.
 
Nikon f1.8 said:
If its a good copy you will not be disappointed, Canons best APS-C lens by far.
Click to expand...

Arrived yesterday.

The zoom range seems tighter and looser at different zoom lengths. My 70-200 is very smooth in this respect

Also, the extending barrel seems loose, like if I jiggle the lens, I can hear it moving. My 17-85 was like this also however.

The image stabilisation is noisy, as is the auto focus...

Are they all like this? It was one of their "excellent" examples

I wonder if I'm being spoilt by the build quality of my 35mm f/1.4!?
 
robz said:
Arrived yesterday.

The zoom range seems tighter and looser at different zoom lengths. My 70-200 is very smooth in this respect

Also, the extending barrel seems loose, like if I jiggle the lens, I can hear it moving. My 17-85 was like this also however.

The image stabilisation is noisy, as is the auto focus...

Are they all like this? It was one of their "excellent" examples

I wonder if I'm being spoilt by the build quality of my 35mm f/1.4!?
Click to expand...

Sounds like it's quite worn. You have a statutory right to return it if you're not happy, and if they have several you could ask for a different one. Make sure you record the serial number to make sure you aren't sent the same lens back again.
 
Last edited:
Rob
sound like you have a duff one there, send it back. if you get a refund make sure they reimburse the original postage as well. They did not for me.
 
Thanks I will contact them on Monday. Annoying as I thought this would be better than ebay!
 
I have a 17-55mm f/2.8 and it's a super lens for Canon crop bodies, it is said that it really should have been a L lens.

Anyway, just checked mine and there is no wobble on the barrel, zoom is nice and smooth but if you jiggle it something is definitely moving (but I have other lenses that do that). Yours sounds faulty.
 
Well a small update for anyone interested. MPB Sorted out an exchange, sent out a different lens (Recorded Serials as recommended) and this one has a fair amount of dust between the elements , can clearly be seen if held up to a light source.

Disappointed with the whole experience of using MPB, thought it would be alright using a big company like that, clearly not. This one will be going back too and just taking a refund this time.
 
robz said:
Well a small update for anyone interested. MPB Sorted out an exchange, sent out a different lens (Recorded Serials as recommended) and this one has a fair amount of dust between the elements , can clearly be seen if held up to a light source.

Disappointed with the whole experience of using MPB, thought it would be alright using a big company like that, clearly not. This one will be going back too and just taking a refund this time.
Click to expand...

A problem with a bigger company is that people can see them as an easy place to get rid of their old tat, and the organisation forgets about things that matter to their customers because of the momentum size brings to their business.
 
MPB state on their site if a lens has dust inside.

Most lenses do if you peer closely enough - which is something best avoided!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top