What to buy ? 17-40/24-70 or 70-200 f4

[loebas]

Curious ?

Intended to buy th 17-40 and 70-200 f4.
In the shop I asked about 24-70 and the price. They had a special offer and as I want this lens too I wonder what I should do ?

Range 17-40 or 70-200
quality of 24-70

[Tom W]

Both setups will give you very good image quality. If you're shooting with the 300D(Drebel), 10D, or 20D, the 17 mm capability is very useful, as 24 mm isn't very wide on the 1.6 sensor.
I'd get the combination providing range myself.

[kiwimichael]

Hi,

Let me start by saying that both the 17-40 f4 L and 70-200 f4 L are EXCELLENT lenses. They are though, 1 stop slower than the 24-70 f2.8 L lens. Your lens choice should also be influenced by the type of photography that you do. For example - lots of wide angel work (e.g. landscapes), sports photography (low light and no flash), wildlife, portraits etc.
As previously mentioned, the ''crop" factor also has aan effect on the 'usability' of a lens. For instance, on a 20D, a 17-40 effectively becomes a 27-64 lens.

Cheers
Michael

[Jon]

What do you have already? And what kind of photos do you take? Were you asking about getting the 24-70 instead of one of the others, or in addition to?

[jbradc]

I have all 3 of those lenses (as well as a 50mm 1.4 for low light) and the 24-70 stays on the camera (EOS 10D) most of the time. I thought that with the 1.6 crop factor the 17-40 would be my "walk around lens" but that is not the case. The 24-70 is much bigger and heavier but it is worth it. Hope this helps.

[Citizensmith]

Quality wise there is not much in it, they are all really good. The 24-70 is just a bit faster. So, do you want one lens, or the wide range, weight and size of two. The 24-70 is a whole lot less versatile but if all you ever shoot is in the 38-110 range the 24-70 would give you then getting two lenses doesn't make sense.

[aam1234]

Do you have the kit lens (18-55)? if you do and you don't often need a WD lens then you can use the kit for that. It's not a bad lens.

[Lenny_D]

Have a look at the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 if you consider the mid-range zoom. Interesting enough, this Tamron lens even outperforms the 50mm 1.8 prime according to Bob Atkins. Look at the thread on 50mm 1.8 lens started by DPP. The link to the review and comparison with the 50mm prime lense:
http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/28_75_Di/index.html

Lenny

[JZaun]

Buy both, no matter which you get you are gonna still want the other one. The 17-40 only leaves my cam for the 100-400 to take very long shots (birds etc)
:)

JZ
J