7D with 24-105L ?

Recently upgraded from a 40D to a 7D and have Sigma 28-70 and 70-200 f2.8 lenses.

I want to start going to Canon glass and have noticed that a lot of forum members have the 24-105 f4 in their collection.

Would you sell the shorter Sigma and get the Canon?

Andy

Yes, but for the 7D, for wide angle, I'd get a 17-55 or such

I agree--at least for what I shoot, you have a big gap. 28mm is approximately 'normal' perspective, so you have no wide angle at all.

The 24-105 is a very popular lens among folks with FF cameras. The closest equivalent for a crop is the EF-S 15-85, which is a very good lens but quite slow (as is the 24-105).

15-85mm is a good choice too

I used both 17-55 and 24-105 on my 50D for some time.
Then i sold my 24-105 as 17-55 is superb..
17-55 is definitely the best choice out there for a crop body.

Now I moved to 5D, I began to miss my 24-105 a little bit...

Love my 24-105 on my 40D and augment it with a 10-20 when I need wide.

What do you not like about your Sigma 28-70? What is its max aperture in comparison to the 24-104/f4?
Was it just a little too long on the short end or a bit too short on the long end?

If you want to stick to a two lens system, the 17-55 sounds good to me, too. I dont see having a gap from 55-70 as a big deal compared to being limited to 28mm. If you want a three lens system, I'd keep what you have for now and add a wide angle to the mix. Perhaps the 10-22 or similar.

I use a 7D with the 24-105. The only thing I don't like about it is that it's not fast enough. For the type of shooting I do, 24 is wide enough for me. Only time I found the 24 not wide enough was taking pictures indoors searching for a new house to buy. I couldn't frame an entire room...had to take 2-3 shots.

I wouldn't sell a f2.8 to get a f4, solely for brand name (unless you're really hurting for CPS points).

That said I've looked at the 24-105, but I can go wider and faster as needed. If you're just looking to move Canon, go 24-70 mkI used and keep the 2.8, look at the 24-1/5 down the road as a daytime workaround supplement. You know based on your sigma what is wide enough for you, and if the next body is a jump to FF, remember the ef-s and aps-c glass will need replacing, stay ef only and more will carry over down the road.

Had a 28-135. Had a 17-50 2.8. Now I have a 24-105 and im super happy. You just gotta try them it first hand and see what works for you. I never found 2.8 to be fast enough which is why I have 1.4 prime.

I've got a Canon 24-105 f4 L and a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 USM and I regularly pair them with a Canon 70-200 f2.8 L MkII. I've used the 24-105 on a T2i, 60D and a 7D loads of times and really like the results it gives me. I was considering selling it when I got the Sigma 24-70 2.8 as I had the full range of it covered but decided to keep it and use it as a walk around lens, it's IQ is fantastic and it's a very handy short to medium tele on a crop.

Nothing wrong with the 24-105 on a 7D if the focal length suits your style, but for me and I may dare say most, it's a little long for a standard zoom. You have so many great EF-s options these days, there are very few good reasons to stick a square peg into a round hole by putting a 17-40 or 24-105 on a crop body.

My personal favorite is the 15-85 - great range, great IQ on par with the 24-105, better IS than the 24-105, great size/weight, great price. But, the Canon and Sigma 17-55/17-50 are very good too - I just never saw the benefit of paying the extra dough and losing out on the benefits of the 15-85 for 2.8 standard zooms on a crop, I feel speed is better handled with fast primes since you don't get much control over DOF at 2.8 on crop anyway.

set your siggy to 24mm and see how you like it. I did that with my kit lens for a while and decided that I would rather have the wide end instead of the long end. So i ended up buying a 15-85 from a friend I know. Variable aperture unfortunately, but certainly no complaints about the wide angle im getting

If you do get this lens, you're going to want IS on all future lens' you purchase

Personally, the 24-105 range would have been perfect for me on my 7D, however, the f/4 on the 7D isn't such a great match IMO. The 7D starts to get noisy above 1600, VERY noisy at 3200...so again, IMO, you are better off with the f/2.8 to keep a lower ISO.

If I had to do it all over again with my 7D, I would have got the 17-55 AND the 15-85. One is not a replacement for the other. They are simply different tools for different tasks. The 17-55 being a low-light performer suited for indoor events and wedding receptions and the 15-85 being suited for a very capable day-time walk-around lens for various trips/outings.