17-85 vs 24-105

[darktiger]

So how many of you all had the 17-85 and upgraded to the 24-105. What do you all think? Was it worth it? I am trying to figure out which one I would use more.

[JohnnyBlood]

I like the Canon 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.flickr.com/photos/latitudes/tags/efs1785mmf456isusm), but I love the Canon 24-105mm f/4.0L IS USM (http://www.flickr.com/photos/latitudes/tags/canonef24105mmf4lisusm).

[tough_dog]

The 24-105 is much much sharper wide open at 24mm than either of my two 17-85's. The 24-105 is still much sharper at 35mm but less so by 50mm, mainly because the 17-85's both come on strong and are at 5.6 wide open. By 70mm all are comparable wide open, but the 24-105 is a stop faster. The 24-105 has equally crisp images at 70-105mm to my 70-200 f4L and f2.8IS lenses with all set to f4. Just like both 70-200 lenses, stopping down the 24-105 to 5.6 increases sharpness (and contrast) only a little - it is almost as good and very usable at f4. Hope this helps.

[chtgrubbs]

24-105 wouldn't be wide enough for me, so I would have to add a wide-angle lens to the gadget bag.