Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

Archive 2013 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L

  
 
pliukait
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


I am going to pick up a 70D when it comes out in September, and will be getting a lens to accompany the camera.

I've been looking at either an EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L; which would you choose?

I am open to other suggestions, either from Canon or other manufacturers; Sigma, Tamron, etc.

I already have a 24-70 F2.8L, but that pretty much lives attached to my 1DsIII.

Please give your vote on which you would get, and if you have other suggestions, please give your reasons why.

I am leaning towards an EFS 17-55 F2.8 but can be persuaded elsewhere if the reasons are right.

Thanks for taking the time to look.

Regards.....Pete



Aug 14, 2013 at 12:58 PM
Jo Dilbeck
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


No question about it, for a crop camera, the 17-55 is the way to go. Were you buying full frame, it would be 24-105 OR the new 24-70 F4 IS. When I shot crop, I LOVED the 17-55, it was the saddest thing to see it go when I went full frame.

Jo



Aug 14, 2013 at 01:08 PM
omarlyn
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


pliukait wrote:
I've been looking at either an EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L; which would you choose?


Which would I choose or which would I suggest you should choose? I would choose the 24-105... I have no idea what I would suggest for you as you failed to mention your shooting interests...that piece of information is very important!

pliukait wrote:
I am leaning towards an EFS 17-55 F2.8 but can be persuaded elsewhere if the reasons are right.


"If the reasons are right" you stated... again, only you know if the reasons are right. Personally, I like to shoot 'longish' and the 24-105 has one huge advantage in this department... it can shoot from 56mm-105mm where the aforementioned EFS 17-55 cannot. That's important to me because of the way I like to shoot...it may be quite the opposite for you. I'd much rather have a 24-105 and a separate lens that's much wider...like a Tokina 11-16 or 12-24 or Canon 10-22...but that's just me.

Omar



Aug 14, 2013 at 01:10 PM
Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


If you are getting the 24-105L IS, I strongly recommend also getting their EF-S 10-22. That will give you a 10X-plus range from the equiv. 16mm - 168mm.

For one lens, I prefer the 15-85 IS lens.



Aug 14, 2013 at 01:13 PM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


The 24-105L is my favorite walkaround optic on FF but I didn't care for it on my 7D (not wide enough). I have the 17-55 2.8 and it's a great lens if you can live with the short zoom ratio. My favorite walk around on the 7D is the 15-85 IS USM. Similar IQ to the 17-55 but a more useful zoom range. I especially appreciate 15mm at the wide end. The trade-off is a slower variable aperture but the 15-85 is more flare resistant, has better close-up focus and has better IS. It also has a little smoother zoom mechanism.

My review of the 15-85:

http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/canon_efs15-85.htm



Aug 14, 2013 at 01:15 PM
pliukait
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


omarlyn wrote:
Which would I choose or which would I suggest you should choose? I would choose the 24-105... I have no idea what I would suggest for you as you failed to mention your shooting interests...that piece of information is very important!

"If the reasons are right" you stated... again, only you know if the reasons are right. Personally, I like to shoot 'longish' and the 24-105 has one huge advantage in this department... it can shoot from 56mm-105mm where the aforementioned EFS 17-55 cannot. That's important to me because of the way I like to shoot...it may be quite the
...Show more

Hi Omar, you're right, I should have mentioned what I shoot. I shoot mostly landscapes and critters; birds and mammals.

I have a 70-200 F2.8 and a 400 F5.6 as well. So the long end will be covered.

And your comment about "If the reasons are right", I agree that it is up to me if the 'reasons' were right. What I am looking for is your reasons, then I can decide if those reasons are important enough for me to be swayed one way or another.

Regards.....Pete



Aug 14, 2013 at 01:48 PM
pliukait
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


Gochugogi wrote:
The 24-105L is my favorite walkaround optic on FF but I didn't care for it on my 7D (not wide enough). I have the 17-55 2.8 and it's a great lens if you can live with the short zoom ratio. My favorite walk around on the 7D is the 15-85 IS USM. Similar IQ to the 17-55 but a more useful zoom range. I especially appreciate 15mm at the wide end. The trade-off is a slower variable aperture but the 15-85 is more flare resistant, has better close-up focus and has better IS. It also has a little smoother zoom
...Show more

Gochugogi, thanks for your comments, I never considered the 15-85 IS because of the slower variable aperture, but you gave me something to think about.

Regards......Pete



Aug 14, 2013 at 01:55 PM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


pliukait wrote:
Hi Omar, you're right, I should have mentioned what I shoot. I shoot mostly landscapes and critters; birds and mammals.

I have a 70-200 F2.8 and a 400 F5.6 as well. So the long end will be covered.

Regards.....Pete


If critters are covered by your telephoto lenses, then would a standard zoom lens option be for landscapes?

I'll suggest one other alternative here- Sigma's 17-70/2.8-4 OS C. Give up some of the range of the 15-85, get more light, but I'm not sure that would be preferable over a 17-55, given your subjects and the availability of a 70-200. The 17-55 is unsurpassed in it's class; the Sigma 18-35/1.8 is quite superior optically, to the point of being an aberration, but that 36mm-69mm gap may be too large; though it could be quickly filled with a 50mm prime.

What do you think?



Aug 14, 2013 at 01:56 PM
pliukait
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


Jo Dilbeck wrote:
No question about it, for a crop camera, the 17-55 is the way to go. Were you buying full frame, it would be 24-105 OR the new 24-70 F4 IS. When I shot crop, I LOVED the 17-55, it was the saddest thing to see it go when I went full frame.

Jo


Thanks Jo for your comments. What was your opinion about the build quality of the 17-55? I've read that it has a 'plasticky feel' about it, not as solid feel to it when compared to a 24-70.

Regards.....Pete



Aug 14, 2013 at 01:59 PM
pliukait
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


johnctharp wrote:
If critters are covered by your telephoto lenses, then would a standard zoom lens option be for landscapes?

I'll suggest one other alternative here- Sigma's 17-70/2.8-4 OS C. Give up some of the range of the 15-85, get more light, but I'm not sure that would be preferable over a 17-55, given your subjects and the availability of a 70-200. The 17-55 is unsurpassed in it's class; the Sigma 18-35/1.8 is quite superior optically, to the point of being an aberration, but that 36mm-69mm gap may be too large; though it could be quickly filled with a 50mm prime.

What do you
...Show more

John, thanks. I do have a 50mm F1.8 prime, the old version with the metal mount. As you said that would fill the gap nicely. The Sigma is really that much better?

I've read that the 17-55 is an 'L' lens in EFS colours, with excellent IQ, so if the Sigma beats it, then it must be spectacular.

Regards.....Pete



Aug 14, 2013 at 02:02 PM
pliukait
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


Thanks everyone for their replies, they are certainly providing food for thought!

Regards.....Pete



Aug 14, 2013 at 02:05 PM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


pliukait wrote:
John, thanks. I do have a 50mm F1.8 prime, the old version with the metal mount. As you said that would fill the gap nicely. The Sigma is really that much better?

Regards.....Pete


If you're comfortable using a prime to fill that gap and you can live without IS, the 18-35/1.8 is sharper at literally every setting in the reviews I've seen, especially sharper across the frame- and the 17-55 is very sharp to begin with. Comparisons with the new 30/1.4 Art put the 18-35/1.8 ahead, and comparisons with the 35/1.5 Art put it only slightly behind.

I'd be skeptical, considering the issues people have had with Sigma's in the past, but I'm not seeing the same feedback in my research; just glowing reviews. Be sure and read a couple and see if it would fit your needs!



Aug 14, 2013 at 02:08 PM
wesley lee
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


I've had the 24-70 (mk 1), 24-105, and now 17-55 on a 7D. The 24's were simply not wide enough for me, but the 24-105 would be my second choice, nice range, good IS. IQ-wise, I think they are all about the same (but a slight nod to the 17-55, yes the non-L).

You may want to check how many photos you've taken with the focal of less than 38mm on your 1Ds. 38mm is equiv to 24 on a crop body.



Aug 14, 2013 at 02:10 PM
pliukait
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


wesley lee wrote:
I've had the 24-70 (mk 1), 24-105, and now 17-55 on a 7D. The 24's were simply not wide enough for me, but the 24-105 would be my second choice, nice range, good IS. IQ-wise, I think they are all about the same (but a slight nod to the 17-55, yes the non-L).

You may want to check how many photos you've taken with the focal of less than 38mm on your 1Ds. 38mm is equiv to 24 on a crop body.


Hi Wesley, I do have quite a few photos of less than 38mm, so that would be a consideration.

Regards.....Pete



Aug 14, 2013 at 02:13 PM
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


On a high MP crop body the choice (between the 2) is hands down the 17-55

I have both , and on my old 40D I used the 24-105 which was great , but when I got the 7D I just found it average . I then got a 17-55 and it just knocked the 24-105 for six .

If the range isn't enough then id think about the 15-85 .

Other options for me have to many downsides . The new 18-35/1.8 looks great but id want something longer as well . The 3rd party 17-50's for me don't come close to the 17-55 . The ff 24-70 2.8's would be of Interest as well (the 24-70 VC in particular) but having gone from a 24 mm bottom end (and almost never using my 12-24 ) to the 17mm is a very big thing



Aug 14, 2013 at 02:32 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


17-55 IS if you want the fastest AF and f/2.8 and IS

Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-VC is VERY good (sold my 17-40L after getting it)

Canon 15-85 IS if you want a really large range and IS and are willing to give up f/2.8

some claim the sigma 16-50 2.8 OS is good

my tamron 17-50 is sharper than my 24-105 was (not that the 24-105 was soft on aps-c at the edges and it looks fine across the frame, just if you compare it side by side to the 17-50 shots, the same shots, the 17-50 ones have more biting crispness center frame); 24mm isn't all that wide on aps-c, only you could possible know which range would suit you better on aps-c

If the 24mm range is an ok starting point for you even on aps-c then you could always look at stuff like canon 24-70 f/4 IS or tamron 24-70 VC since they could also be used on the other body (where they would probably perform better than your current 24-70, of course then you are left with nothing for the 70D again )



Aug 14, 2013 at 03:09 PM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


Jo Dilbeck wrote:
No question about it, for a crop camera, the 17-55 is the way to go. Were you buying full frame, it would be 24-105 OR the new 24-70 F4 IS. When I shot crop, I LOVED the 17-55, it was the saddest thing to see it go when I went full frame.

Jo

This .. 17-55 just rocks best lens on crop though I would be tempted with the new sigma 1.8



Aug 14, 2013 at 04:51 PM
jake13
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


I've had the Canon 17-55 since I owned my 40D, now I use it with a 7D. I really can't imagine a better lens for APS-C. It stays on the 7D 85% of the time. f/2.8 with IS can't be beat.

The other thing I've been noticing lately is the price of used lenses. The 17-55 is the only lens in my kit that I bought brand new, so the used market has been my main provider of glass in my kit. Lately, prices seem really low. Just bought a 24-105 for $575. I bought it to couple with the 5D bargain body I just picked up last month. Saw a 10-22 for $500 on FM yesterday, and I think I saw one a while back for $475. There is a 17-55 for low $700 range. Now is a great time to pick up a 10-22 and 17-55 for nearly the price of the 17-55 new. These are two superb lenses for APS-C.

I've heard nothing but good things about the 15-85. For me, the 17-55 is the only choice. By the way, tried a couple of Sigma primes on the 7D and sold them because of AF issues. No more third party glass for me, but that's just me.

Good luck with your choice.



Aug 14, 2013 at 05:14 PM
vaflower
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


Sigma 18-35 F/1.8. No question about it. Canon 17-55 or Sigma 17-50 could be in contention if you plan to do video occasionally. For pure photography, Sigma 18-35 trumps all. The two other rooms to Sigma 18-35 is very much like Canon 24-105 L to Canon 24-70 mk II. But while the Canon 24-70 mkii is twice more expensive than Canon 24-105L, you can get the Sigma 18-35 at similar price to Canon 17-55. At 799$ price point for the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, I don't see the Canon 17-55 attractive until it drops to less than 500$.

Really who would choose Canon 24-105 over Canon 24-70 mkii in a fair trade ?




Aug 14, 2013 at 05:19 PM
John Mills
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Choose between EFS 17-55 F2.8 or EF 24-105 F4L


Wouldn't the 17-40mm be a better choice than the 24-105mm as it is much closer in focal length to the 17-55mm? And it is always good value for the price.


Aug 14, 2013 at 06:39 PM
1
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.