Weight of 24-105L f/4 IS vs. 17-55 2.8 IS?

[Mum2J&M]

For any of you who own, or are familiar with both of these lenses, which weighs more? Are they comparable? I would guess it would be the 24-105, but I'm not sure. I also have the 35L. Is it comparable to that weight? Thanks.

[BigBlueDodge]

I've had both, and the if I remember correctly, they both weigh pretty close to the same. I think on paper that the 24-105L will be heavier, but it was negligable to me. Both lens are pretty much the same size. If deciding between the two all you really need it decide if you want wider and faster or longer and slower. Both are great lenses.

[SimonG]

... if I remember correctly, they both weigh pretty close to the same. ...
Indeed they do:

EF-S 17-55: 645 g / 22.8 oz
EF 24-105 L: 670 g / 23.6 oz

For reference, the 35 L weighs in at 580 g / 20.5 oz.

[Mum2J&M]

Compared to the 950 grams of the 24-70, that seems like a cake walk!

[tdaugharty]

No diff .. I tend to think the 24-105 only b/c it has a red ring on it and it makes me feel like I'm holding something heavy vs the efs .. it's purely a brain thing though ;)

[terriyaki]

I have the 24-105 and my brother has the 17-55 and I'd say that they both weigh about the same. On paper the 24-105 is heavier but the small difference in real life use is negligible.

I think the differences in focal range, maximum aperture, and build quality are things you should be looking at to help you decide which you need for your style of shooting.

[ScottE]

I think the differences in focal range, maximum aperture, and build quality are things you should be looking at to help you decide which you need for your style of shooting.

Lets not ruin an esoteric discussion with real issues. Now, again, how many angels will fit on the head of a pin.

[Wilt]

For any of you who own, or are familiar with both of these lenses, which weighs more? Are they comparable? I would guess it would be the 24-105, but I'm not sure. I also have the 35L. Is it comparable to that weight? Thanks.


One is a wide-angle-to-short-tele lens for APS-C; the other is a wide-normal-to-medium-tele lens on APS-C

One is f/2.8 and the other is f/4

One has 3:1 zoom range, the other has 4:1 zoom range.

One is EF-S mount, the other is EF mount.

So how would any two things so very different be 'comparable' in any way, except size or weight or price?

[Mum2J&M]

I meant weight only. I understand the differences otherwise.