Looking for suggestions for a wider angle for a 7D

I've got a 7D camera and a 50mm prime, a 100mm macro and a 70-20 2.8. I do have a 17-85 lens but I dont like it, the colours always look drab to me, and it has heavy vignetting at 17. I'd like to get a wider angle and I'm tossing up between the 17-55 efs or the 24-70. Any suggestions and or advice on what would compliment the 7D. I'll consider other lenses too if they get good recommendations.

17-55 is superb.

IMO the 24-70 (whilst a great lens) is too wide on a 7D/crop and also not at its best at 24mm.

Look at the 10-22 also.

Tokina 11-16 f2.8 or Canon 10-22 both get great reviews for wide angles. I definitely agree that 24mm is not that wide on a crop.

The 17-55 is a great all purpose lens. It spends a lot of time on my 7D and I have been very pleased.

Rob are those pics with the 10-22 or the 17-55?
edit, s'ok I looked them up

I find I rarely need wider than 17mm, and I can always stitch pano's

Very few shots I find need wider than that but when i do I use my 10-20..

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/zarphag/5823422​426/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/zarphag/5754154​706/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/zarphag/2278235​998/

I guess the first question should be: what are you shooting? Landscapes, architectural, interiors, automotive, skateboard videos (haha) etc?

the EF-S 10-22 is an effective 16-35 . . . VERY wide on a 7D and PERFECT (IMO) for the above mentioned stuff. I find myself shooting at 22mm much more often than 10mm on that guy. but its a great lens and it gets my vote.

The 17-40 f/4 L was the best lens I bought so far.

If 17mm is sufficient for you it is the way to go, since it is relatively cheap, too.

I find that 17mm on a crop is wide enough for architecture and already gives you heavy distortions. Not quite that good for landscaping, but I don't want to get a wider lens with less quality for the same money.

I've got a 7D and find the EF-S 10-22mm works well with it. Pix are sharp and you get to explore a wide range of creative perspectives with the wide angle. Like you I started with a 50mm, and when I wanted to get wider I went with a 35mm (my mistake with a crop sensor). The 10-22 turned out to be the best choice in the end. I tested out the 24-70 recently (which I will get eventually to complete my focal range), but found at 24mm the lens was not wide enough (IMO - maybe it's because I already own the 10-22).

I would recommened renting or borrowing a 10-22 and seeing what it can do for you and whether it complements your shooting style. If you choose to buy, the 10-22 really holds it value and you can get quite a bit back on the used market.

J_O_S_H_U_A wrote in post #12825393
I guess the first question should be: what are you shooting? Landscapes, architectural, interiors, automotive, skateboard videos (haha) etc?

the EF-S 10-22 is an effective 16-35 . . . VERY wide on a 7D and PERFECT (IMO) for the above mentioned stuff. I find myself shooting at 22mm much more often than 10mm on that guy. but its a great lens and it gets my vote.

I'm not sure this is correct, if it's an EF-S doesn't that mean it's what it says, 10-22, not effectively 16-35. If it was just an EF 10-22 then it would be a 16-35 on a crop body. That's how I've understood it anyway, I'm happy to be corrected.
Anyway I want it for landscapes and beachy shots with my whippets. I like the focal range of the 17-85 efs that I already have, I am just constantly dissappointed by the quality of the shots, the colours are drab and it has alot of vignetting at 17mm. I'd like a better quality lens with a similar or slightly wider focal range.

10-22 is canons UWA for crops, as 16-35 (or more correctly IMO, 17-40L) is canons UWA for FF.

10-22 isnt comparable to the 16-35l in many ways, lacking the build, sealing, f2.8 aperture etc...

More comparable to the 17-40L, which (build and sealing aside) I think the 10-22 is the better lens.

Take a look at the pics posted for the sigma 17-70 os hsm. Those of us who have this lens love it. I have the sigma 10-20 as well and I pretty well stopped using it after I got the 17-70.

Btw, rob, your pics are fantastic!