Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 07 Dec 2009 (Monday) 03:48
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

17-40 or 24-70

 
s2kennyc
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Likes: 237
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Southern CA
     
Dec 07, 2009 23:29 |  #31

K6AZ wrote in post #9155062 (external link)
Not that plain and not that simple. Some people would find the extra 15mm on the long end much more useful than the 7mm on the wide end compared to the 17-55. The 24-70 is only about 20% more than the 17-55 and is of far superior build quality.

But the 17-55 has IS and I would bet the picture quality between the two is a toss up. I've owned both at one time and I would recommend the 17-55 2.8 for a 7D, and a 24-70 for a 5D.


-Ken
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
S30L28
Senior Member
Avatar
448 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: √Čtats-Unis
     
Dec 07, 2009 23:30 |  #32

+1 on the 24-70.

I have both and it's the main lens on my 5D.


-Brian

Equipement d'appareil photo
Seller Feedback:1 (external link), 2 (external link), 3 (external link), 4 (external link), 5 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Dec 07, 2009 23:41 |  #33

s2kennyc wrote in post #9155257 (external link)
But the 17-55 has IS and I would bet the picture quality between the two is a toss up. I've owned both at one time and I would recommend the 17-55 2.8 for a 7D, and a 24-70 for a 5D.

It's all in what you're used to I suppose. I don't find IS particularly useful with standard zooms. I learned the hard way before IS and even digital was available to the consumer market.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cy88
Senior Member
Avatar
818 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
     
Dec 08, 2009 00:12 |  #34

s2kennyc wrote in post #9155257 (external link)
But the 17-55 has IS and I would bet the picture quality between the two is a toss up. I've owned both at one time and I would recommend the 17-55 2.8 for a 7D, and a 24-70 for a 5D.

Same here, 17-55 and 24-105 at the same time. There's no way I would sacrifice the wide end on the 17-55 for the "L" as a walk around lens. Especially in this comparison, there's almost no quality difference.

S30L28 wrote in post #9155264 (external link)
+1 on the 24-70.

I have both and it's the main lens on my 5D.

Keyword: It's on your 5D.

K6AZ wrote in post #9155317 (external link)
It's all in what you're used to I suppose. I don't find IS particularly useful with standard zooms. I learned the hard way before IS and even digital was available to the consumer market.

What is IS good for then? Your comment is quite bias in my opinion. IS can be useful in a lot of scenario depends on what you shoot (ie. Longer shutter for water fall, handheld low light portrait shots, to compensate hand shakes - to name a few). It's here when you need.

Why go for something that's not made for the crop body, when there's a better lens that's being made with more features?

Remember, 7D has 18MP to crop if you need "more reach" (15mm). However, there's no way you can crop a picture to fit more stuff in. Well, you can, by taking multiple shots and stitch them together but thats not always fun or as easy as cropping.

My opinion still stay - Go with 17-55 F2.8IS if you are on a crop, 24-105L or 24-70L if you are on full frame.


6D | 5D2 | 24L II | 35L | 85L II | 100L | Panasonic GX7 | Olympus 12/2.0 | Panasonic 20/1.7
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Dec 08, 2009 00:35 |  #35

cy88 wrote in post #9155473 (external link)
Why go for something that's not made for the crop body, when there's a better lens that's being made with more features?

Remember, 7D has 18MP to crop if you need "more reach" (15mm). However, there's no way you can crop a picture to fit more stuff in. Well, you can, by taking multiple shots and stitch them together but thats not always fun or as easy as cropping.

My opinion still stay - Go with 17-55 F2.8IS if you are on a crop, 24-105L or 24-70L if you are on full frame.

The 17-55 is not a better lens by any stretch of the imagination. I know it is a sacred cow for some but for a lens that expensive the build quality is lacking and that is being nice. A quick search just on this forum will turn up hundreds of complaints on this lens. I've rented one and while it was good as far as optics I wasn't impressed at all by the construction for a lens that sells for over $1000.

As far as IS, sure it's nice to have it but again it seems to be a surrogate for proper technique with a lot of people. I own several lenses that have it and it is switched off on lenses under 100mm.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cy88
Senior Member
Avatar
818 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
     
Dec 08, 2009 01:22 |  #36

K6AZ wrote in post #9155570 (external link)
The 17-55 is not a better lens by any stretch of the imagination. I know it is a sacred cow for some but for a lens that expensive the build quality is lacking and that is being nice. A quick search just on this forum will turn up hundreds of complaints on this lens. I've rented one and while it was good as far as optics I wasn't impressed at all by the construction for a lens that sells for over $1000.

As far as IS, sure it's nice to have it but again it seems to be a surrogate for proper technique with a lot of people. I own several lenses that have it and it is switched off on lenses under 100mm.


I take pictures with my camera and lenses, so the optics and features are the most important to me. What do you do with yours that optics/features are not as important as the built quality? :lol: Is construction more important than IS, and worth to sacrifice for the wide end?

Some people do experience dust in the front element, but everyone knows that dusts in the front would not effect the image quality unless you are shooting at F22, then there might be a chance that it'll show up. With that said, I've seen quite a bit of dusts in the L's.


6D | 5D2 | 24L II | 35L | 85L II | 100L | Panasonic GX7 | Olympus 12/2.0 | Panasonic 20/1.7
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Dec 08, 2009 01:41 |  #37

I've got no complaints about the optics. My complaint is with the build quality of the lens, it really should be better. It seems to me the OP has decided on a L lens and was asking between the 17-40 and the 24-70, The answer to that of course depends on what and how he shoots. To turn this around a bit I was looking at the same choice and went with the 17-40. I shoot mainly outdoors during the daytime and most of the time stopped down several stops from wide open. On a crop most of my shooting is between 20 and 40 so the 17-40 worked great for me and I haven't regretted it. We all have different shooting styles and subject matter and a one size fits all lens doesn't exist, even the 17-55.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DavidG.
"My name is Rumpelstiltskin​"
Avatar
201 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2008
     
Dec 08, 2009 01:53 |  #38

I've used quite a few of the higher quality Canon lenses these past few years, ranging from the 16-35 2.8L to the 600 4L (millimeter wise) and I've got to say that the 24-70 2.8L lens is the best zoom lens I have ever used, bar none.

Go for the 24-70. You won't regret it. I promise. ;)


Canon 5D Mark III | Canon 7D | 17-40 f/4L | 24-70 2.8 L | 70-200 f/4 L | 70-200 f/2.8 L IS | 580 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cy88
Senior Member
Avatar
818 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
     
Dec 08, 2009 02:11 |  #39

DavidG. wrote in post #9155850 (external link)
I've used quite a few of the higher quality Canon lenses these past few years, ranging from the 16-35 2.8L to the 600 4L (millimeter wise) and I've got to say that the 24-70 2.8L lens is the best zoom lens I have ever used, bar none.

Go for the 24-70. You won't regret it. I promise. ;)


...until he finds out he needs IS and the wider angle, which he could have had with the 17-55 even at a cheaper cost. :lol:


6D | 5D2 | 24L II | 35L | 85L II | 100L | Panasonic GX7 | Olympus 12/2.0 | Panasonic 20/1.7
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AK ­ Elephant
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
102 posts
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Anchorage, AK
     
Dec 08, 2009 04:17 |  #40

So many people saying to go with the 24-70 yet they all have FF cameras.. Hmmmmmm

I have been playing with the 24-70 tonight and am going on a scout tomorrow that I will use it on.

I will post how I liked it in the evening. Altho tonight I have already see that I wish it was a little wider


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Dec 08, 2009 04:46 |  #41

AK Elephant wrote in post #9156162 (external link)
So many people saying to go with the 24-70 yet they all have FF cameras.. Hmmmmmm

I have been playing with the 24-70 tonight and am going on a scout tomorrow that I will use it on.

I will post how I liked it in the evening. Altho tonight I have already see that I wish it was a little wider

I have a 7D and my 17-40 stays planted on it most of the time. The 17-40 just turns out to not meet the needs for most with croppers. The 24-70 is a great lens whether it's on crop, FF, or film. It all depends on if your shooting style is mostly in that range. If you shoot a lot wider than 24mm or longer than 70mm you might want to look at some of the other choices mentioned here.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DStanic
Cream of the Crop
6,148 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Canada
     
Dec 08, 2009 07:02 |  #42

IS is useful if you are planning on shooting in churches or dim lighting where flash is not allowed. If you are not going to be pushing it below 1/60 (or maybe a bit lower then that) then a non-IS lens should be fine.

24-70L would be REALLY nice as a portrait lens on a 7D, but for a "walkaround" the 17-55 range is better on a 7D.

You already have a 10-22 so a 17-40 f/4 is pretty pointless. At least get the 24-70 for extra reach and f/2.8, or the 17-55 for the most useful range with the added bonus of IS. I'm also not impressed with the build quality of the 17-55, but it's the images that it produces that's what counts! The IS and USM on it work quite well.


Sony A6000, 16-50PZ, 55-210, 35mm 1.8 OSS
Canon 60D, 30D
Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 17-35, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 85mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
device01
Member
130 posts
Joined Feb 2007
     
Dec 08, 2009 07:08 |  #43

depends on whether if your planning to get FF one day. I got the 24-70 on the 7D, and im happy with it.
Building and preppin for FF one day my self. You got the 10-22 - so go with 24-70

if your not planning to go FF - consider Canon 17-55 2.8 IS or the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 VC

good luck


Canon 5D MKIII - Canon 7D with BG-E7 grip - 24-70 2.8L - 85 1.2L MKII- 35 1.4L - Tokina 11-16 2.8 - 600EX-RT - 580EXII - 430EX - AB1600 - VagabondII - HO Beauty Dish - Cybersyncs - 'Big Mama' Westcott Apollo Softbox - other modifiers

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LBI
Member
127 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Honolulu, HI
     
Dec 08, 2009 14:42 |  #44

The 24-70 was too wide for me on my 40D, especially indoors. Replaced it with the 17-55 and I couldn't be happier!


5D | 7D | 50 1.4 | 24-105L | 70-200 2.8L | 580EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cy88
Senior Member
Avatar
818 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
     
Dec 08, 2009 14:49 |  #45

device01 wrote in post #9156535 (external link)
depends on whether if your planning to get FF one day. I got the 24-70 on the 7D, and im happy with it.
Building and preppin for FF one day my self. You got the 10-22 - so go with 24-70

if your not planning to go FF - consider Canon 17-55 2.8 IS or the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 VC

good luck

As I've mentioned, it's too soon to worry about "upgrading to FF" as he just got a 7D. If one day he does, he can sell the 17-55 very easily and upgrade to 24-70.


6D | 5D2 | 24L II | 35L | 85L II | 100L | Panasonic GX7 | Olympus 12/2.0 | Panasonic 20/1.7
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,561 views & 0 likes for this thread
17-40 or 24-70
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is heflerbj
1007 guests, 324 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.