Lens selection: a 10-22 or 24-105 ?

I will rent one lens to complement what I already have: Rebel XSi, 50/1.8, 18-55. My photos will be of my girlfriend, outdoor scenery, and hotel. Which lens would best fit my needs? I will be on a trip for a week.

I know the 10-22 is great for smaller places, like a church. And its good for dramatic effects of people up close as well as capturing like what the eye sees. However, I've never experimented with zooming in from afar, so I thought maybe the 24-105 would be a great carry around. That way I could zoom in on people without having to be close.

I'd love to take both, but working with budget.
I'm looking for advice and reasons for choice. Much appreciative.

24-105 for me.

I have the 10-22 and love it but it all comes down to what you want to shoot. For indoors or wide scenery or tight spots the 10-22 (and other UWA) will do things other lenses won't. However if you won't be in tight situations a lot the 24-105 will be the better option. That said, if what you really want are natural photos of people than you will likely want something longer than 105mm. Just my 2 cents.

your girlfriend would probably slap you if you were taking a bunch of shots of her with the 10-22mm

that's not saying it's impossible to get good portrait shots with an UWA...i just think the 24-105mm would work for you better

24-105
or 17-55, similar FL to your kit lens, but f/2.8, IS and better IQ

24-105 vs your max 55 isn't THAT much different. The 10-22 is plenty of fun!

I vote 10-22 OR 70-200. I really think the 24-105 just won't be much different in terms of range.

10-22mm is my personal choice, but it really depends on how you like to shoot.

Livinthalife wrote in post #10465442
24-105 vs your max 55 isn't THAT much different. The 10-22 is plenty of fun!

I vote 10-22 OR 70-200. I really think the 24-105 just won't be much different in terms of range.

It made all the difference for me. I sold my Tamron 17-50 and my 10-22 to buy the 24-105.

But as said above, it all depends on what/how you shoot. Look through your existing shots and see what focal lengths you are using. Well over half of my 17-50 shots were at 50mm and very few were below 30mm.

randy98mtu wrote in post #10465988
It made all the difference for me. I sold my Tamron 17-50 and my 10-22 to buy the 24-105.

But as said above, it all depends on what/how you shoot. Look through your existing shots and see what focal lengths you are using. Well over half of my 17-50 shots were at 50mm and very few were below 30mm.

Same here, 50 was too limiting. 24-105 for me. I just got back from hawaii and used the 24-105 on 95% of my shots.

On a recent trip to Washington DC I took 4 lenses: Sigmas 10-20 and 30, Canon 17-40, 70-200 2.8. By far the most used lenses were the 17-40 and 70-200. I think if you're not used to a UWA it takes some time to get used to taking interesting images with it. I had to force myself to use the 10-20 and didn't really get anything worth keeping. By contrast, I wasn't going to bring the longer lens but it was on the camera at least 50% of the time and I'm really glad that I did. Does depend on what you're shooting and you're shooting style, though.