Next Lens on the 7d

Hi...I have just upgraded from a 450d to a 7d and my current line of glass is - 18-200 Sigma, 10-22mm ex Sigma and Canon 50mm 1.8.
Till the time I had the 450d the 18-200 was my all purpose lens (travel, potraits, candid, landscapes etc.)used it for almost 2 years now. Post the upgrade to 7d I have noticed IQ issues and less sharpness from my 7d when using the 18-200mm. Also at forums I have noticed comments from various photographers that such tele zooms do not do full justice to a camera such as 7d.

Which brings me to the question which is frequently asked by many people - should I invest in a L lens (24-105) or look at maybe 17-55/2.8 which is not L but reputed for its IQ and sharpness. I do not see myself parting away from the 10-22mm sigma anytime soon. 24-70 I have kept out of view in light of weight issue.

Any suggestions will be highly appreciated.

What do you see yourself wanting to shoot more in the future? 24-105mm is a great lens on a 7D - as long as it covers your needs

Hi...general photography...close to what I have mentioned in my first post.

Thanks

For a general purpose lens, the 15-85 (similar to the 24-105 on FF) will be very uselful.

Question is do you need 2.8 and don't need the extra reach. If you don't than the 17-55 will be a better option.

Beside the 24-70L, there is the new tamron 24-70, which is lighter and reviews say its slightly better, and has an OS.

I used to have the 24-105 (sold it just 2 days ago), and its a great walk-around lens. But I think it won't be as wide on crop body as on a FF, and it will bother you sometimes (it will be a 38mm on crop, which is good for full body candid shots, but not when you want to capture a whole street, which means swaping lens).

I dont think I really need the 2.8 but coming from a 18-200 I think I will miss the extra reach if using a 17-55....

manavjs wrote in post #14920542
I dont think I really need the 2.8 but coming from a 18-200 I think I will miss the extra reach if using a 17-55....

It comes down to what you value more, image quality or convenience.

You own an interchangeable lens system for a reason.

Ask yourself, 'why do you upgrade to the 7D in the first place?' Wasn't that all for better IQ?

If you don't like switching lens, just keep using the 18-200 and continue sacrificing in qaulity.

Every single lens has its pros and cons. You want excellent IQ with constant f2.8 aperture? You sacrifice on range. That's life.

Learn to deal with them.

Thanks and I agree kin2son.

But how bad the IQ could be if using a 24-105 as compared to 17-55? I see almost equal popularity between these two?

manavjs wrote in post #14920576
Thanks and I agree kin2son.

But how bad the IQ could be if using a 24-105 as compared to 17-55? I see almost equal popularity between these two?

24-105 is not bad at all! But it's still just a f4, so it really isn't a great improvement over your 18-200 in terms of maximum aperture.

17-55 is optimized for crop cameras such as your 7D, excellent IQ, constant f2,8 aperture and with IS.

The general upgrade path is 17-55 + any 70-200 when you require more reach.

On my Canon 7D, I found the 17-55 to be superior. On my Canon 5D Mark III, I love the 24-105.

That's how it has panned out for me,
Bryan

Thanks...it would be worth to hear from someone also who has used 24-105 extensively on a 7d...how much does the f4 impact overall...

I use a 24-105 on a 7D and used it for many years on a 40D,I love the lens ,its sharp,has good reach and personally I don,t find f4 restricting.
Before I bought it I tried the 17-55 and found it too short.
As you are intending keeping the 10/22 then you have the wide end covered then unless you really need f2.8 get the 24-105.

You use mostly variable aperture lenses- that start at 3.5/4.0 and go out to 4.5 or 5.6. So, unless you are sticking to the wide end exclusively- you should not experience issues with the variable aperture 15-85 or the fixed f/4 of the 24-105L. The difference between a 15-85 and the 24-105 will be that of convenience.. With your 10-22, you've got the wide end covered- but it's really a matter of whether you want a solution that uses the 10-20 for the wide end and the 24-105 for the normal range- or a single lens that covers most of the range- like a 15-85 or 18-135. Part of the thing is- for some- starting out at 24- is acceptable for a single lens- and for others- maybe not. The 15-85 is about 100 grams lighter.. The 24-105 - has the 77mm filter size.

Being a crop- I'd probably opt for the 15-85 first- and the 24-104 as a second option. Mainly - because of the wide end. Unless you have a need for the f/2.8 of the 17-5x, I would not give up the range as it can be rather inconvenient to be limited to the 17-5x range.

On my crops, I tend to actually use a 18-135 more than anything, but I also have a 17-50 f/2.8 sigma that I use for indoors/low light when I need it. It's really an underrated lens. The newer 18-135 STM lens is sharper than the original 18-135. But, often enough, I do wonder if the well reputed 15-85 would be worth the investment.

Thanks, certainly gives me some more direction to move with 24-105...i have heard mixes reviews of the 15-85....not sure

I have the 24-105L and use it on my 60D. It gives you images that rival those from primes, but with better contrast than the 35f2, for example. Color and contrast are excellent.
It is a fine lens. I use a fast prime for low light, so the F4 is not a problem for me. I already had the Tokina 12-24 to cover the wide end. I like the range of the L, and AF is very fast and accurate.
If I wanted to limit myself to one lens, I'd probably have to choose between the 17-55IS and the 15-85IS. However, I have lots of lenses, and like the range of the 24-105L.

I was in the exact same situation as you, upgrading from a 450D to 7D and got the same lenses as you.
I was looking for a better replacement for my 18-200 as a walk-around lens. Super zooms just aren't good enough for a 7D.
After lots of reading I decided on the 15-85 and - WOW! - I am very pleased. It is very fast focusing and the IQ is superiour.
It took a micro adjustment on +7 but is now spot on.