canon 17-55mm f/2.8 v.s 24-105mm f/4

which one should i get...i only have a APS-C camera...but who knows in the near future i will upgrade to FULL FRAME....advice pleas...

Get the 15-85 for a t3i.. more versatile on the wide end, and cheaper, then both of your choices.


However you already list the 17-55 in your signature.. so you already made up your mind?

Lexar wrote in post #15619317
Get the 15-85 for a t3i.. more versatile on the wide end, and cheaper, then both of your choices.


However you already list the 17-55 in your signature.. so you already made up your mind?

sorry my bad...18-55mm....do you have a link or any picture or revue to back up 15-85mm

Great reviews can be found here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

You can spend hours there reading.

Good revue here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

The 15-85 is not: f/2.8, constant f/4, 105mm or usable on a FF camera.

I think you should do what I did and get then 24-105mm lens. It is a great focal length for a general purpose lens and f/2.8 is not fast, just faster than most lenses. You should definitely get the 24-105mm lens because it is best for me.

The above statement is actually stupid. It is silly for me to recommend what you need based on what works for me. All of the lenses previously mentioned are perfect for someone. Only YOU know which is best for YOU.

I do recommend giving strong considerstion to the focal length that fits your needs.

APC = 17-55, it's an all around better lens. The 24-105 is a very nice one as well and for a FF camera, it's about a near perfect walk around lens. (I'm dying to try out the new 24-70 f/4IS) But as it stands today, the 17-55 fills that bill for a crop camera. Sharper, less distortion at 24mm and up, just a solid piece of glass.

Judge for yourself in comparison

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=1​&APIComp=1

I am not sure the 17-55 is a hell of a lot sharper... For me the reduced DOF rather than the faster aperture does the trick.

MakisM1 wrote in post #15619494
Judge for yourself in comparison

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=1​&APIComp=1

I am not sure the 17-55 is a hell of a lot sharper... For me the reduced DOF rather than the faster aperture does the trick.

It's not a lot sharper, true, both lenses are outstanding, but it is sharper. Also, you should try and compare same class bodies not a 1D and a 50D. This is the same but with a 60D and 50D (can't get the same) Also the 17-55 at 28mm (can't get 24 but the fringes are always the weakest).
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=2​&APIComp=1

I tried both 24-105 and 17-55 on my T3i. I wanted the 24-105 because of the red ring and it is about the same price as the 17-55. I'm considering going to full frame one day. With that said, I still bought the 17-55mm 2.8 used. I bought it at a great price for a great copy. I like to shoot indoors at family gatherings so the 2.8 was really a get selling point. To me F4 won't cut it. When I move up to a full frame I could always resell it and get the 24-70 2.8.

Go with the 17-55. Trust me.

17-55 easiliy. Faster and better focal range. When you go to FF, worry about swapping out lenses later. Seriously, dont worry about FF capabilities till you get there.

It's like buying a minivan for the kids you dont have or buying an engagement ring for the girl of your dreams... which you havent met.

the 24-105 is a huge focal length on crop, but 17-5X is enough for a single lens solution. It's the jack of all trades for crop.

Ok guys most of you go for the 17-55 uhm i kinda want that also but the thing is also have the 18-55 kit lens..to back me up when i need a wider range...
.for now i realy dont need a faster lens if need one i can put on my 50mm f1.8...the real question is.terms of a IQ of the 24-105 is it as sharp as the 17-55...if i am taking the 17-55..i will also consider comparing it to the sigma version 17-50mm OS...coz this three lenses is almost same prices....

bryjosh9385 wrote in post #15619873
...the real question is.terms of a IQ of the 24-105 is it as sharp as the 17-55.......

This is where things get dicey. The 17-55 is a sharper lens throughout it's range but when you start talking these levels of sharpness, your going to have to do some serious pixel peeping to see the difference.

Also, which 18-55 do you have? 18-55IS is not a bad lens and stopped down it's almost as sharp as either the 17-55 or 24-105.

gjl711 wrote in post #15619935
This is where things get dicey. The 17-55 is a sharper lens throughout it's range but when you start talking these levels of sharpness, your going to have to do some serious pixel peeping to see the difference.

Also, which 18-55 do you have? 18-55IS is not a bad lens and stopped down it's almost as sharp as either the 17-55 or 24-105.

i have the kit lens 18-55 IS that came with my t3i

Bottom line is that you have to decide what is more important to you.. f2.8 or a better range.
If f2.8 is more important then get the 17-55 or the Sigma 17-50 for much less.

If range is more important to you then get the 15-85 since its a much better range for a crop body then the 24-105.

I know thats why i want to rent the 17-55