7d- 16-35II or 17-55?

Hi, I`m going to upgrade my gear now and are not really sure on which lens to get. I will use it mainly for landscape and cityscape/architecture​.
Can anyone help me with some input ?

Best
Tore

Easy, 17-55. Half the price, sharper, has IS, and has more range. Only downsides are that it's EF-S and the build quality is not as good as an L lens.

what's wrong with your 10-22mm?

17-55!

17-55

If you need f/2.8 then 17-55, if not 15-85

Another vote for the: EF-S 17-55

DreDaze wrote in post #15800447
what's wrong with your 10-22mm?

I agree with this question.

If you are looking for another lenses then definitely the 17-55.

I looked at several of your photos on Flickr and many were shot at f/10. Do you really need a f/2.8 lens? I want a deep DOF, usually to infinity, when shooting landscape. I guess a deep DOF could be obtained at f/2.8 but it is not for me.

You already have an UWA, two fast primes and a telephoto. You might want an additional lens for general purpose/walkaround or a top quality zoom to replace the 55-250 but (repeating a previous question) "What is wrong with your 10-22mm?" for landscape and cityscape/architecture​.

General purpose: Probably the most discussed issue on POTN.
17-55mm f/2.8 is good if you want a fast zoom and the focal length fits your needs.
24-105mm f/4 is good if the aperture is acceptable and a longer focal length is preferred.
15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 is a good compromise on focal length but it is not fast or a constant aperture. It is least expensive of the three.

I chose the 24-105 because of the focal length. I use a flash if there is insufficient light for f/4 in lower light situations like inside my home. This is for ME and might not apply to YOU!

Top quality zoom - Any version of Canon's 70-200mm lenses. I strongly recommend avoiding any of these "L" lenses or you risk being infected with the "L" disease for which there is no cure other than buying another "L" lens.

10-22mm if that isn’t cutting it then get the 16-35mk2

17-55 for sure.

Call me weird, but I went with the 16-35 for my. 7d, also have the 24-105 for more reach. If I'm spending that kind of cash it better have a red ring on it

Nothing wrong with my 10-22, but I want something with a longer ranger. I just sold a 17-85 lens. Is the 15-85 better than that lens?

torel78 wrote in post #15803151
Nothing wrong with my 10-22, but I want something with a longer ranger. I just sold a 17-85 lens. Is the 15-85 better than that lens?

All comes down to whether you need/want constant f2.8.

17-55 ...no question