Well, I decided to upgrade my lenses, and since everybody seems to agree that one should primarily invest in glass rather than body, will be keeping the T2i for now
Just purchased my first L lens, the 70-200 2.8 II, which is simply great
Even though it was the most expensive option, it seemed to be the best investment, considering its focal length and the almost unanimous accolade
Now I do not have much money left, and all the other zoom L’s get some level of criticism that makes me think twice about any of them
I own a crop, but plan to go to the 5d, probably by the time it is upgraded by Canon, so no interest in the 17-55 2.8 Efs,
If I was rich I’d get the 14 L, the 24 1,4 II, the 35 L and the 50L right now hehe, problem solved!

obviously I cannot afford that (consider also that I have to pay much more for I live in Brazil and here a 17-40 costs 1k USD and a 50l 2,3k!)
Other than money issues it would just not be the most practical thing to do, weight and convenience are also important factors
I plan to have three lenses, and three only, already have one of them (the 70-200), and wish to buy a 5d after I get these 3 supposedly ideal glasses, so which ones should I get? 17-40, 24-70 and 24-105 are the first zooms that come to mind, just one of them have to suffice, though I may have to sacrifice the wide end with a t2i for the time being
The third one would be a prime, 24 35 or 50 on a 5d?
Sorry for the loooong message , but I am going nuts here, especially concerning the "normal" zoom lens! These L lenses are becoming more popular around here, but as they are even more expensive it is still not so common to own a set of L's not being a pro
Fortunately for you that does not seem to be the case in a richer country like the US, so I'd like to hear it from you
Thanks for your patience

I'd still suggest the 17-55 f2.8 IS. It's f2.8, for one, and IS, for another. You can buy one used and sell it when you upgrade your camera but why limit yourself for the intervening years? If you're not going to go full frame for a while you should probably wait on a re-release of the 24-70. There are always rumors that that lens will get updated.

If you want to save money, you can look into a tamron or sigma 17-50 lens for your camera. They work great and they're less than 50% of the cost of a 17-55.

The 17-40 f/4L on a 5D works very well...also in non L, there's the Canon 50 f/1.4, not expensive. Many who have Ls also have this lens, then there is the Canon 85 f/1.8, also a non L and and not expenseve, many L users have this lens too. Both the 50 & the 85 are very good in low light or inside where flash is not allowed. Both work well on the 1.6 crop and the full frame.

Jefferson

It's somewhat difficult to make lens recommendations when you don't tell us anything about what you plan to spend your time shooting.

24-70

bpark42 wrote:
It's somewhat difficult to make lens recommendations when you don't tell us anything about what you plan to spend your time shooting.

+1

however, the 35L on the 5D I find to be incredible.
another gem to consider if it fits your needs is the 85/1.8.

35,85,70-200 makes a nice kit, assuming it suits your fancy.

I loved the tammy 28-75f2.8 and still use it - although it getting loose and rubber rippling off after @6 years. It's a lot more $ now, so might not be the best option now.

Depends what you view of "normal" is 17-40f4 would be the cheapest IF that fits in your view.

You could also go with some nice primes - canon 50f1.4, canon 85f1.8 or alike.

I would consider 16/35 whick will translate to a 25-56 ish on your cropper and be a great lens on your full frame body also.
I have owned the 24/70 and it is a good lens, but Tamron and Sigma are close to iq, albeit a bit slower to focus in low light than the Canon, for a lot less money. I must admit that I am not the biggest fan of the 24/70 and others on this forum, love it much more than I.
I also love the 24 on a crop and full frame.
Would really love to know what you plan on shooting. Disadvantage of the 24 zooms and 24 prime is almost 39 perspective on a 1.6 cropper; not very wide.
17-40 is a great lens, if you can live with f4.
My best advice is to rent or borrow b4 you purchase, to see what works best for you.

on a cropper, with little $ to spend, I'd get the tamron 17-50 non-VC. I loved it when I had a 40D.

what do you photograph?

mjeffbr wrote:
Well, I decided to upgrade my lenses, and since everybody seems to agree that one should primarily invest in glass rather than body, will be keeping the T2i for now
Just purchased my first L lens, the 70-200 2.8 II, which is simply great
Even though it was the most expensive option, it seemed to be the best investment, considering its focal length and the almost unanimous accolade
Now I do not have much money left, and all the other zoom L’s get some level of criticism that makes me think twice about any of them
I own a crop, but plan to go to the 5d, probably by the time it is upgraded by Canon, so no interest in the 17-55 2.8 Efs,
If I was rich I’d get the 14 L, the 24 1,4 II, the 35 L and the 50L right now hehe, problem solved!

obviously I cannot afford that (consider also that I have to pay much more for I live in Brazil and here a 17-40 costs 1k USD and a 50l 2,3k!)
Other than money issues it would just not be the most practical thing to do, weight and convenience are also important factors
I plan to have three lenses, and three only, already have one of them (the 70-200), and wish to buy a 5d after I get these 3 supposedly ideal glasses, so which ones should I get? 17-40, 24-70 and 24-105 are the first zooms that come to mind, just one of them have to suffice, though I may have to sacrifice the wide end with a t2i for the time being
The third one would be a prime, 24 35 or 50 on a 5d?
Sorry for the loooong message , but I am going nuts here, especially concerning the "normal" zoom lens! These L lenses are becoming more popular around here, but as they are even more expensive it is still not so common to own a set of L's not being a pro
Fortunately for you that does not seem to be the case in a richer country like the US, so I'd like to hear it from you
Thanks for your patience

If you're planning on the 5D, the 35L would be simply incredible. The 85 f/1.8 is another excellent choice.

mjeffbr wrote:
Well, I decided to upgrade my lenses, and since everybody seems to agree that one should primarily invest in glass rather than body, will be keeping the T2i for now
Just purchased my first L lens, the 70-200 2.8 II, which is simply great
Even though it was the most expensive option, it seemed to be the best investment, considering its focal length and the almost unanimous accolade
Now I do not have much money left, and all the other zoom L’s get some level of criticism that makes me think twice about any of them
I own a crop, but plan to go to the 5d, probably by the time it is upgraded by Canon, so no interest in the 17-55 2.8 Efs,
If I was rich I’d get the 14 L, the 24 1,4 II, the 35 L and the 50L right now hehe, problem solved!

obviously I cannot afford that (consider also that I have to pay much more for I live in Brazil and here a 17-40 costs 1k USD and a 50l 2,3k!)
Other than money issues it would just not be the most practical thing to do, weight and convenience are also important factors




Seeing it might be a considerable trime until 5D II is replaced, I would consider the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (VC or non VC) or the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 for your T2i. Both lenses are viable alternatives to the Canon 17-55, but at a fraction of the price are comparable in IQ; both are well regarded.

If a 5D III comes along, worry about the glass for that then. By that time we may see updates to the 24-70L and 24-105L as well as 35L. Also I believe in waiting for several months after a new camera ships before buying one, to ensure no major issues and several firmware updates.

The 35L is one of those lenses that is a great focal length on both crop and FF. Wait until you buy your ff and see if the kit lens is a good deal. Right now, a 5D MK II plus 24-105 is available at a excellent price, the 24-105mm lens works out to $700 extra which is a deal!

I don't know if its the same in Brazil or not.

In the lower cost models, a 35mm f/2 would also work well on both cameras.

well, back after a paying a visit to the chinese mall, or more like a warehouse full of tight booths with the best prices in São Paulo for all things photography, even though prices are still incredibly steep compared to american standards

first, let me thank you for taking the time to try and shed light to my situation

as for the kinds of things I shoot (sorry for not bringing that up earlier), love portraits, pets and bigger animals like horses, low light photography, architecture, do not really care for macro, sports or wild life

the 70-200 2.8 IS II is stunning for basically anything within its focal range, so no point in crossing the 70`s border with an 85 for instance, unless I was talking low light exclusively, but for that I believe the 35 (or the 50 1.2) would be more appropriate as they are much wider, as I happen to face low light inside buildings quite often (and streets may be dangerous at night in São Paulo, went to France and was so happy no one seemed to notice I had a DSLR )
anyways, the 35, 50l or maybe the 24II, would be my third really good lens, and unfortunately it will have to wait a bit , for low light I`ll have to stick with the very nice sigma 30 1.4

my predicament now lies with the zoom choice more than anything
thought about the 16-35 as Tom Dix pointed out, but read that it would not be much better than the 17-40 in terms of IQ, and it is much more expensive
Some of you suggested tamrons and sigmas
other than the fact that they may be a tad difficult to find around here (I had a real tough time finding the sigma 30 for instance, bought it used from a spanish photographer), I`d really like to stick with the canon EF lenses from now on anyways, it is about buying and being satisfied not wanting to replace it the next day
after checking the prices of all my desired glasses it seems there is only one way to go

let me explain, first the list and price tags:

50 1.2 USD 2122
35 1.4 USD 1955
17-40 USD 1123
24-70 USD 2011
24-105 USD 1040
16-35 USD 2015

As I said the 50l and the 35 will have to wait anyways, I can live with the very good siggy 30 for now, so let us move on to the zooms

it is shocking - the 24-105 is cheaper than the 17-40! How come? Well, it is simple, the chinese importers take the 5d kit lenses and sell them separately!

now it seems the question I have to ask is: what do you think of the 24-105, since it is by far the best deal, kinda dislike the f4, but love the IS idea, what are your thoughts?

TrojanHorse wrote:
I'd still suggest the 17-55 f2.8 IS. It's f2.8, for one, and IS, for another. You can buy one used and sell it when you upgrade your camera but why limit yourself for the intervening years? If you're not going to go full frame for a while you should probably wait on a re-release of the 24-70. There are always rumors that that lens will get updated.

If you want to save money, you can look into a tamron or sigma 17-50 lens for your camera. They work great and they're less than 50% of the cost of a 17-55.

I have to agree with this. I was in the same boat as you and tried every possible way to keep from buying a lens that wouldn't work on full frame. The truth is that the 17-55 2.8 IS is the perfect all around lens on aps-c and you should get that. You will miss out on all the great features of this lens. No L series lens duplicates the features of this lens. Get a used one and sell it for the same or slightly less than you paid when you upgrade.

There are other really great aps-c only lenses you should get too! The sigma 30 1.4 and the tokina 11-16 2.8.

saneproduction wrote:

I have to agree with this. I was in the same boat as you and tried every possible way to keep from buying a lens that wouldn't work on full frame. The truth is that the 17-55 2.8 IS is the perfect all around lens on aps-c and you should get that. You will miss out on all the great features of this lens. No L series lens duplicates the features of this lens. Get a used one and sell it for the same or slightly less than you paid when you upgrade.



I disagree. The OP said he's low on money and to me that immediately rules out the overpriced IMO 17-55 f/2.8. If it were the only game in town that would be one thing, but we have high quality alternatives at less than half the price in Tamron's case. I knoiw there are some Canon lens snobs around that won't touch a third party lens, but the OP should at least try them if money is an object.

I believe I suggested the tamron or sigma variants, but the OP is also fixated on spending wads of cash on L lenses that he can use on FF, even though there are "better" EF-S or crop only alternatives. That seems crazy to me, but I guess we all have different priorities.

I don't know what the resale market is like down in Brazil, but that's usually a good way to extend your money.

scalesusa wrote:
Right now, a 5D MK II plus 24-105 is available at a excellent price, the 24-105mm lens works out to $700 extra which is a deal!

I have a love hate with this lens. This morning, I did some executive portraits. Once the setup was made, I did 3 people in under a half hour. Using the 24-105, I was able to vary the framing, sync the focal length with ETTL strobe (24-105). Center cut on a 5d, the photos are very sharp. For a walk about lens it is ideal on ff or crop, and it has IS. Once in a while I wish it was faster, was a little sharper, or transmitted better color. Yet, I can think of no other lens that has that kind of versatility, and certainly not for about $1000 or less as a kit lens.

Grant

well, even if I wanted to I could not find a 17-55 used, the used market is not very appealing here, only a few stores and prices are not too much better either

new it goes for 1500 usd here, to me, as good as it may be, how can it fight a 24-105 for 2/3 of the price? It seems I'll keep my siggy 10-20 (which was going to be sold for the deal) for wider stuff and get the 24-105

also I'd like to say that with great amounts of taxes, limited availability, sky high prices and a restricted market you'd better make the right choice

so that you can have and idea, canon is officialy in Brazil, have authorized dealers and stuff, who ask 5100 usd for a 70-200 II, for example

sigmas and tanroms can only be found via chinese malls or in the always restricted second hand market

once again thanks for your help!