Next to 28-135mmIS

[ORR888]

Hi everyone! I’ve been lurking this forum for one&1/2 months now and certainly many of you helped me adapt to the world of dSLR faster than I thought.
After having 28-135mmIS USM for a month, my next lens in mind is an “L”. A 17-40f/4L (an upgrade for lens kit) or pricier 24-70f/2.8L (a walk around lens upgrade)? Concerned mostly with quality indoor/ outdoor memories of family & friends, which do you think could serve the purpose most? Any idea is appreciated.

Newby & unprepared to collect lenses, I have to let go 28-135mmIS in exchange for less affordable 24-70L. If ever I’ll go this way, how much shld I sell it for (including 3 filters & EW-78B2 LHood) and where? Thanks!

[Dante King]

Welcome ORR888!! 24-70 is a STELLAR walk around lens. 2.8 is killer for low light. I would do this over the 17-40 as it is f/4 and again is a not too hot for low light indoor shots. 24-70 will cover most of your focal length used right now and covers alot of the 17-40 as well. Funny, I looked at the 24-70 and opted for the 28-135 for the IS and savings of 1000$$.

You can sell your lens here in the market place. As for price, I will leave that up to others. You might want to take a look at the prices on BH and make a diecision form those figures. Again, Welcome to POTN!!!

[tim]

The F4L probably isn't fast enough for indoors photos without flash.

[condyk]

Sell each item separately, lens, hood, filters, and you will find you get more, rather than sell it all as a single set. The Tamron 28-75 or Sigma 24-70 DG are good alternative upgrades over the IS. I dunno, maybe you'd then have some change for a decent wide angle too. Tokina do some good ones and at very attractive prices over Canon. My 20-35 f2.8 is extremely nice and produces plenty of keepers.

As Tim says, f2.8 is what to aim for ... and try to keep to that, or better, throughout your range. If indoor shooting is mainly what you use your gear for then might be worth factoring in a decent flash. The 24-70 L is expensive and maybe there are better ways of spending your money and getting better mileage from it.

[ORR888]

Thank you much for sharing your ideas! I have few more weeks to come up with the decision. Now I'm leaning more on the 24-70f/2.8L. Bigger aperture is a must as I don’t get as much good quality pics indoor as I do outdoor with my lens. A member in the family is at the verge of buying dSLR, he might start the way I did. If he chooses not my lens, marketplace is my next visit. Again thank you guys!

[steibeldj]

Big difference seen when I got the 28-70 over my 28-135 IS. Low light photography improved, but not quite as much as I expected. What really improved was the overall clarity of the pictures. It is not just background blur and sharpness. Colors etc. improved. It is a heavy lens and larger than one would expect, but it feels really solid on my 20d and the AF is fast and smooth.

[ronmuller]

The 28-135mmIS USM is one I've been thinking of buying for when I travel. Sounds like a decent lens although I've never tried it. I own the 24-70L and have no regrets, it is one nice piece of glass. In 5 years your DSLR will be worth 1/10 of todays price. The 24-70L will hold onto its value much better. At least that is how I justified it to myself ;)

Cheers,
Ron.