 Blake T. Lipthratt |
need to decide between 2 lenses... Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM or Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS I think I'm about to buy the 400D & since I'm more than likely not going to spare the extra few hundred for the 30D (or should I?), I want some really good glass. Both of these are in the $1000 range, so price is not a factor when choosing between the two. I know L glass is supposed to be "superior" but then again that f/2.8 is looking mighty attractive with other. Suggestions?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Suzanne Colson |
They are both great lenses indeed. A tough decision. You will lose the reach with the 17-55mm. Whether that is a factor or not just an observation. I do find that when I use my 17-40 f/4.0 I am often in a lot of light so I don't require the larger aperture. When I do jump up to longer lengths I am finding myself needing the larger aperture. Also keep in mind the 17-55 will only work on crop body cameras. Again may not be a factor in your decision, but I wanted to mention. I don't think you would be going wrong with either. If I assume (which may not be a good idea) you have the kits lens. That is only 18-55mm. Are you finding it long enough? Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
If you want a 28 mm wide angle focal length, you'll need the 17-55 mm lens. If you're looking formore telephoto than wide angle, then you'll want the 24-105. Don't forget teh 1.6 lens factor for all CAnon cameras exept the 5D and the 1D Mark III
|
|
|
|
||
|
Brooke M. Lewis |
If it were me, I would go with the 24-105 L. I just bought my first L series lens and love it. I was surprised at the difference it made in photo sharpness. Have you considered the 24-70 f/2.8 L? More expensive, but in my opinion, the perfect all-around lens.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Blake T. Lipthratt |
yeah the 24-70 was actually what I was originally going to go with. I still haven't totally gone against it. It's really big...which doesn't bother me too much. But I didn't know if I could get pretty much get the same results out of the 17-55mm f2.8 ...and still have that wider angle...all in a smaller package. ???
|
|
|
|
||
|
Suzanne Colson |
I believe that was the reason for introducing the 17-55 in an EF-S mount. The 24-70 with the crop sensor just doesn't cut it for some. I opted not to go with the 24-70 because of all the supposed problems with back-focusing issues. The other option is a Canon 28-70mm f/2.8L lens. It is discontinued, but you can get a used one for right around $700. Review wise it is slated as a very solid lens without all the potential back focus problems and from experience I can agree. I use it quite a bit in low leight situations. When it is not wide enough I can pull out my 17-40. If you are still opting for the 24-105L I would say it is a great lens. What you can do is study some of your EXIF data and see what shutter speed and aperture settings you are currently needing. If you don't need the extra stop the 24-70 or 28-70 offers then the 24-105 covers the best range.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||