'Getting Even Closer to Getting One'

[Flyball Rebel]

I'm nearly there but having second thoughts about 17-40 f/4 L USM, a very good lens no doubt. But I am now leaning toward the 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM, I think it would be a much more practical lens for my use and it's that much faster. More $$$, yes, but more usable. If any owners of the 24-70 have any comments, good or bad, I would much appreciate hearing them. Thanks in anticipation.....Regards [F.R.] :) :)

[ssim]

I have the 24-70f2.8 L, the 16-35f2.8 L and the 70-200f2.8 L IS and without a dbout the 24-70 spends most of the time on my 10D. It is a great all round lens. Very sharp and fast.

While hindsight is 20/20 I would have got the 24-70 before the 16-35.

I have no complaints whatsoever about this lens.

[MediaMagic]

...without a dbout the 24-70 spends most of the time on my 10D. It is a great all round lens. Very sharp and fast.

...

I have no complaints whatsoever about this lens.

Ditto.

[scottbergerphoto]

I have the 24-70f2.8 L, the 16-35f2.8 L and the 70-200f2.8 L IS and without a dbout the 24-70 spends most of the time on my 10D. It is a great all round lens. Very sharp and fast.

While hindsight is 20/20 I would have got the 24-70 before the 16-35.

I have no complaints whatsoever about this lens.
Ditto on all three except I went for the70-200 2.8 non IS. I definitely use the 24-70 f/2.8 as my main walk around lens. This was taken with it:

http://www.pbase.com/image/19977263.jpg

and this one:

http://www.pbase.com/image/19977239.jpg

Regards,
Scott

[Jesper]

I'm nearly there but having second thoughts about 17-40 f/4 L USM, a very good lens no doubt. But I am now leaning toward the 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM, I think it would be a much more practical lens for my use and it's that much faster. More $$$, yes, but more usable. If any owners of the 24-70 have any comments, good or bad, I would much appreciate hearing them. Thanks in anticipation.....Regards [F.R.] :) :)

More or less useable.... that depends on what you want to use the lens for. You don't say what your use is, so it's a bit difficult to tell which focal length range will suit you best.

For portraits, don't get the 17-40, because it's too wide. If you want a wide angle lens, the 17-40 is excellent. I got the 17-40 because I often found my 28-135 IS USM not wide enough on my 10D.

[mjordan]

I love my 24-70 2.8. The 28-105 USM lens I had been using in that range stayed on my D30 when my wife took it over (and of course I had to buy a replacement for my 10D :lol: ). I found that the extra 4mm of width surprisinly made a real difference in the shots I take. And I think the lens is even sharper than my 70-200 2.8L IS.

Mike

[Belmondo]

I have a bunch of lenses, almost all of them are Canon L. Of those lenses, the 24-70 is my absolute favorite. The camera is always stored with the 24-70 on it because probability tells me that if I need the camera in a hurry, the lens I'm most likely to need will already be on it.

[Flyball Rebel]

Thanks for the replies, guys. What with reading your reports and the thread 'Yikes......' I'm now getting real close. Talk to you later when you see a thread named, 'GOT IT'!!!! Regards [F.R.] :) :)

[adamsti]

Does everybody find the 24-70 wide enough on a 10D. I do a lot of airshows, the Reno Air Races, and drag racing as my main subjects. At the wide end the 24-70 is effective is 38.4. This does not seem wide enough to get a static airplane into a shot. So what are the airshow shooters with 10D's using here? I have not had much of a chance to play with mine, I have only had it 5 days.

[sp00g3]

Does everybody find the 24-70 wide enough on a 10D. I do a lot of airshows, the Reno Air Races, and drag racing as my main subjects. At the wide end the 24-70 is effective is 38.4. This does not seem wide enough to get a static airplane into a shot. So what are the airshow shooters with 10D's using here? I have not had much of a chance to play with mine, I have only had it 5 days.

Obviously you are talking about the planes sitting on the tarmac at the airshows.. As ones in flight you would want to use a telephoto. If you want wider go with the 17 - 40. If you are doing airshows.. most likely there is enough light for the F4 :)

[adamsti]

I already have lenses for in flight stuff. I use the 300 f/4L (no IS), and the 70-200 f/2.8L IS, and both 1.4, and 2X. I have my 28-70 f/2.8L on Ebay right now because I want a wider lense for the 10D.

[BDM]

I'm nearly there but having second thoughts about 17-40 f/4 L USM, a very good lens no doubt. But I am now leaning toward the 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM, I think it would be a much more practical lens for my use and it's that much faster. More $$$, yes, but more usable. If any owners of the 24-70 have any comments, good or bad, I would much appreciate hearing them. Thanks in anticipation.....Regards [F.R.] :) :)

I have the 24-70 for my DRebel. I finally got an Epson 2200 last week and have outputted my first prints. I have made perhaps a dozen 8X10 prints and a few 14X17 prints. The large prints, in particular, just blow me away. The quality looks very close to medium format. They are very sharp and smooth. The lens is a bit heavy but it certainly works very well. And the DRebel is very impressive. I do think the focal length spread is such that it is perhaps the most useable range for a first lens.

Bruce

[adebartolo]

I've got both 17-40 and 24-70. The 24-70 "lives" on my 10D. It's aperature and zoom range are just about perfect for me most of the time. Sharp and colorfull results.

[Flyball Rebel]

Thanks again for all the replies. It's the 17-40mm L for now I think, and perhaps the 24-70mm L a little later. Regards [F.R.] :) :)