which walkabout lens?

A

AndyJC

Messages
356
Name
Blarg
Edit My Images
Yes
the 17-55 F2.8 IS EFS
the 24-105 F4 L IS
the 24-70 F2.8 L

Which is actually the best lens? The-Digital-Picture seems to go for the 17-55 over both the others.. what do others think? (going on a 7D .. however I'm always just tempted to go for L for the fact I always aim to get a 5DmkII in the future)
 
I have just gone through the same decision making process about the same 3 lenses and will be collecting the 24-70 f2.8L tomorrow!).

I chose the 24-70 f2.8L because it was within my budget, it fitted nicely in the range of my current lenses, I had heard that the 7D needs good glass to get the best out of it (am picking up the 7D tomorrow too) and it would be good in lower light conditions.

If you clarify in your own mind
budget,
use,
your other lenses

.......then the answer will come
 
I have gone the different route to Nigel. I have a 17-55 on my 7D. In fact it was on my 50D and 450D as well. This is a great lens and the f2.8 is great in lowe light. As is the IS, which I would really consider hard about being without.

I have always said to buy your lens for now. Who knows, maybe you will go FF, maybe not. I do find I use the 17-20mm quite a bit, in fact so much that I went out and bought a 10-22 as well as sometimes the 17-55 just wasn't wide enough.

Would I consider losing the 17-24mm end? No way. But, if you've already got a UWA then it won't do too much of a loss.

I don't think you'll find a huge amount of difference in IQ, but the 17-55 is different in terms of build to the L glass. It is more plasticy and doesn't feel so well made. Has it fallen apart in my hand? ........ Not yet!!
 
Having had all three, i would have to say my favourite was the 17-55. I love that lens 2.8 and IS and really sharp, only got rid of it to get the Mk3.

I got the 24-70 to replace it and wouldnt swap it for anything. Its a great big lump put produces excellent pictures.
 
I have only used the 24-105 out of those three co can only coment on that one. I really like it. I note you saying at some point you want to get the 5D mkII, if you do then you won't be able to use the EF-s lens only EF so it might be worth getting either the 24-70 or 24-105.
 
I had the 24-105 on my 7D and it is without doubt an excellent lens. Both build and optics are very good, however I always felt I missed width, and upgraded to the 17-55mm. IMHO the optics on the 17-55 are better than the 24-105 and you gain an extra stop, but the build quality and lack of extras (hood and case) mean that is is overpriced. I have not owned a 24-70 but have used one on a 5D MkI and it is superb - so well built you can club a seal to death with one and take pictures afterwards.

If you are serious about going FF in the near future I would suggest the 24-70 or 24-105. Both are class. If you will keep the 7D there is not a better walkabout lens than the 17-55. It is the "24-70" of the crop world with the addition of IS, and subtraction of ultimate build quality. F/2.8 and IS is nice.
 
AndyJC said:
the 17-55 F2.8 IS EFS
the 24-105 F4 L IS
the 24-70 F2.8 L

Which is actually the best lens? The-Digital-Picture seems to go for the 17-55 over both the others.. what do others think? (going on a 7D .. however I'm always just tempted to go for L for the fact I always aim to get a 5DmkII in the future)
Click to expand...

Depends if you want the wide angle capability. That's the problem with the smaller sensor camera's, the 1.6x crop factor, you lose the 24mm because its framed like a 38.4mm. The 24-105mm and 24-70mm work better on a full frame camera. I've only used the 24-70mm at work, I can see why people like it, its a good lens, and the 24-105mm sits nicely on my 1D, where the 1.3x crop isn't as severe, and I'm happy with the results from that.

It depends how soon you intend to move to FF, you have a 400D at the moment, and looks like your moving to the 7D, are you then going to change that for a 5D or keep 2 bodies. If your keeping 2 bodies, why not get the 17-55mm f2.8, this lens would be superb for a cropped sensor body.

It really depends what you want to photograph, me personally, full frame's not for me, as I shoot motorsport, aviation and wildlife. I've actually been thinking about the 17-55mm for my 20D.
 
Depends entirely on your shooting style. Some people prefer telephoto, others prefer wider lenses, different jobs require different type of lens. My shooting style is generally wide and up close, so I know for a fact that when I get the sigma 10-20 it will be my primary lens. If only I could justify a full frame camera ;)
 
Thanks for all the replies - guess I'll go for the EFS lens then and keep a bit of money and save for the 24-70 F2.8 IS L if /when it arrives ;)

I need to get a wide angle lens as well. However, i'm not really into wideangle pics.. yet... so that's down on the list of things to buy
 
The 24-70 and 24-105 aren't really wide enough for a walkabout lens on a APS-C body. A bit more useful on a APS-H and perfect on the FF (because that is where they come from). I had a brief time with a 24-105 on my 30D and it was a pain in the bum IMHO.

I'd really recommend you at least start with owning a 17ish-50ish lens of somesort. If the Canon one is mentally priced, try a Sigma 18-50 f2.8.

Failing that get one of the proper walkabout designed things like a 18-200.

Don't get hung up on the letter "L" :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top