Forced into digital !! But what glass to buy ??

[Gazza]

Due to some nocturnal visitors my gear was ripped off...
This pushed me into a 10D... well i was half jumping already.

Now to flesh out the glass department

70 - 200 is in tha bag already.. luv it.

the poser is
do i go for

24 - 70 L

or

17 - 40 L
50 1.4
85 1.8

Used for portraits family groups that sort of thing. Is the 24 - 70's flexibility going to outway the speed gains of using the two primes ??

Thoughts there anyone..
PS this is a great forum

[sGu]

17 - 40 L
50 1.4
85 1.8

I'd go with this combination, i now have 24-70mm, but it doesn't get used very often, considering its cost alone, the other one would be far more affordable and equally good if not better quality pictures.

with 17-40mm and 50mm, plus you moving about, 24-70mm range is easily covered, and with f1.4, u'll be able to shoot in low light condition like no other lens does.

[maderito]

I agree with sGu. I have the same lens set (including the 70-200). I'm so used to the sharpness of the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8, that I worry that I will be disappointed with the 24-70L which costs and weighs a lot more. I've debated this for almost a year now and still haven't changed my mind.

There are others, however, who are very happy with the versatility and performance of the 24-70L.

[timmyquest]

What they said.

[newdamage1]

Due to some nocturnal visitors my gear was ripped off...


OMG! Aliens stole your stuff?!? Those little green Bastards! :lol:

Kelly

[Tom W]

I agree with sGu. I have the same lens set (including the 70-200). I'm so used to the sharpness of the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8, that I worry that I will be disappointed with the 24-70L which costs and weighs a lot more. I've debated this for almost a year now and still haven't changed my mind.

There are others, however, who are very happy with the versatility and performance of the 24-70L.

I'm one of the few lucky buttheads that has both the 24-70 and the 17-40 zooms. The 24-70 is the default lens of choice for me, as it covers a range that I find most useful for my style of shooting, and it has a very useful f/2.8. Its a little bit wide and a little bit long. However, I do find that I bump into the wide end occasionally, and thus appreciate having the 17-40. Both are versatile and both overlap sufficiently that you could easily take one or the other for many situations.

But I find the longer lens to be more useful in catching indoor candids and snapshots at parties, receptions, and such when I am part of the celebration. It also works well for portraits and I use it quite often when I shoot trains and other such things outdoors. It will work fairly well for building and architecture photography as well, though that is where I bump into the wide end a bit.

So, I guess it depends on your type of photography. Think about the lenses you used the most with your old equipment, apply the 1.6 factor (and consider the future of a 1.3 as well), then decide which lenses match those needs.