Sold my 70-200 F4L for a 2.8 L.Which one should I get now?Please help.

[Kelv2888]

I am trying to decide between the 24-70 F4L and the 70-200 2.8 L.
I have a 17-40 F4L already and shoot mostly scenic,indoors,and portraits of my kids indoors.
I am planning to replace the 17-40 F4L too in the future for another 2.8 because I need the extra light and the weather sealing in the 2.8s.An upgrade to a mark 2 would complete the seal in the future.
Should I sell the 17-40 then buy a 70-200 2.8L IS or just get the regular 2.8 and upgrade to the 16-35 in the future?
Thanks for your help guys.:rolleyes:

[dsze]

I'm not sure I understand...the 24-70 and the 70-200 are 2 completely different lenses for different purposes. You can't really compare them. Which one you decide to buy should depend on how you want to use it. You can't use the 24-70 in situations that you'd need the 70-200 for.

-daniel

[I Simonius]

I am trying to decide between the 24-70 F4L and the 70-200 2.8 L.
I have a 17-40 F4L already and shoot mostly scenic,indoors,and portraits of my kids indoors.
I am planning to replace the 17-40 F4L too in the future for another 2.8 because I need the extra light and the weather sealing in the 2.8s.An upgrade to a mark 2 would complete the seal in the future.
Should I sell the 17-40 then buy a 70-200 2.8L IS or just get the regular 2.8 and upgrade to the 16-35 in the future?
Thanks for your help guys.:rolleyes:

I really wouldn't sell thje 17-40 unless you absolutely must have the extra stop, you're paying a lot for it with the 16-35 anbd I doubt you'lll see any difference at the other FLs.

If you''re going to be shooting regularily indoors your choice should better be between the 70-200Lf4 WITH FLASH, as this is the cheapest and sharpest of the 70-200s or the IS if you don't want to use flash. I wouldn't go inbetwen with the 2.8 non IS.
The f4 is MUCH ligter than the 2.8s so better for scenic (i.e. you have to carry it awhile)

If you can stand the wheight and the extra cost go for the IS zoom, otherwise go for the f4 and use a flash when it's too dark

[SkipD]

I, like David, see no similarity between the 24-70 and the 70-200 when considering the intended uses. I own and love both the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 IS. They are, however, used for totally different types of work. I use the 24-70 for most "general" applications, and choose to use the longer lens or my 16-35 f2.8 for the exceptions.

I would choose the 24-70 over the other two for most normal people pictures and most overall scenery pictures. I use the 70-200 (with or without a X1.4 extender) for stuff that I want to "reach out and touch" at a distance. I typically use the wide angle lens for building interiors, some scenery shots, etc. There are many exceptions to these generalities, of course.

What I would NEVER do is choose to have a set of lenses that left me with big gaps in the focal length range.

I'm always wanting something wider or longer than what I own, but I think the better half would part my hair with a rolling pin if I bought another expensive lens before she gets her pantry and some other projects finished. At least I have a continuous (with some overlap) set of choices in the lenses I already own.