feeda wrote in post #17887784
I'd definitely prefer my 17-55 over 3 affordable lenses. The 17-55 has great quality, IS, and f/2.8 (faster than the kit lens and not too much slower than the primes). Different strokes, just wish it were a bit wider, say 15mm
Indeed. Not only does it depend on what you like to shoot, but how you like to shoot it. If you don't like to change lenses, then the 17-55mm is definitely a winner. I wound up also owning a 10-22mm for landscapes and I found a 17-55mm f/2.8 to be redundant, especially with a Fast 50 in my life.
Plus, I personally like having a shallow depth of field in my photos, and 2.8 on a crop doesn't really facilitate that. That's why I'd go with a 50mm f/1.8 STM, a 28mm f/1.8 or 35mm f/2.0, and a cheap kit zoom (18-55mmish), which, stopped down, doesn't give up much to the 17-55mm.