Canon 24-70II on a 7D

Anyone using this combo ? ? ? I'm especially interested if you came from the 17-55. Any thoughts on your purchase ? ? ? As the 17-55 is so highly regarded I want to know how they compare. I know it's not wide on the crop, I can deal with that.
Anyone ? ? ? ? ?

The 24-70 will be much sharper than the 17-55 because already the 24-105 is sharper. But I am not sure if it was better for you to buy a less expensive lens like the Tamron 24-70. The corners aren't as good as that from the Canon but on Crop, they aren't in your frame anyway.

h14nha wrote in post #15922355
Anyone using this combo ? ? ? I'm especially interested if you came from the 17-55. Any thoughts on your purchase ? ? ? As the 17-55 is so highly regarded I want to know how they compare. I know it's not wide on the crop, I can deal with that.
Anyone ? ? ? ? ?

there's something unnatural, almost barnyard about that mating !

Did not like that combo. I missed the mm u der 24. For me personaly the 17-55 is a better option on crop sensors.

Rally like my 5D III 24-70 II combination.

lennartsw wrote in post #15923270
The 24-70 will be much sharper than the 17-55 because already the 24-105 is sharper. But I am not sure if it was better for you to buy a less expensive lens like the Tamron 24-70. The corners aren't as good as that from the Canon but on Crop, they aren't in your frame anyway.

I'm not sure what your saying, is it that the 24-105 is a sharper lens than the 17-55 ? ? ? I don't want the Tamron as I am possibly buying this lens while I wait for Canon to pull its finger out and develope something I'm interested in buying. Whether that's APC, APH or FF I'll wait and see but my idea is to have 24-70, 70-200 and 100-400 as a lens set and no more.

ed rader wrote in post #15923340
there's something unnatural, almost barnyard about that mating !

Are you saying the 24-70II is too good for a 7D ? ? ? I have the 70-200II and it is noticeably sharper than my 17-55 ( although the AF is sloooooow by comparison ). That is what I want to know, will I see an obvious increase in IQ when I use one. I don't think a lens upgrade a waste on any camera be it crop or not..........

Superdaantje wrote in post #15923475
Did not like that combo. I missed the mm u der 24. For me personaly the 17-55 is a better option on crop sensors.

Rally like my 5D III 24-70 II combination.

Ah so you actually used them ? ? ? I'm ok with 24 not being too wide, for me that's ok. What I want to know is your opinion of the attributes of one versus the other please

h14nha wrote in post #15923476
I'm not sure what your saying, is it that the 24-105 is a sharper lens than the 17-55 ? ? ?

Yes. At f/4, the 24-105 is as sharp as the 17-55 but has less distortion. At f/5.6, the 24-105 is sharper and has less distortion again.
At The-Digital-Picture.com, the 24-105 is even sharper than the 24-70 II on crop. But of course you're missing f/2.8 and probably have slower autofocus. But on full frame, the corners of the 24-70 should outperform the 24-105.

h14nha wrote in post #15923476
Are you saying the 24-70II is too good for a 7D ? ? ?

I believe that's exactly what he's saying

kin2son wrote in post #15923532
I believe that's exactly what he's saying

no that's not what i'm saying at all. why don't you check with me first next time before speaking for me ?

h14nha wrote in post #15923476
I'm not sure what your saying, is it that the 24-105 is a sharper lens than the 17-55 ? ? ? I don't want the Tamron as I am possibly buying this lens while I wait for Canon to pull its finger out and develope something I'm interested in buying. Whether that's APC, APH or FF I'll wait and see but my idea is to have 24-70, 70-200 and 100-400 as a lens set and no more.

Are you saying the 24-70II is too good for a 7D ? ? ? I have the 70-200II and it is noticeably sharper than my 17-55 ( although the AF is sloooooow by comparison ). That is what I want to know, will I see an obvious increase in IQ when I use one. I don't think a lens upgrade a waste on any camera be it crop or not..........

it sounds like you are not sure what you are going to do but you want the lens. in that case buy it. if you haven't already .

ed rader wrote in post #15923340
there's something unnatural, almost barnyard about that mating !

h14nha wrote in post #15923476
...Are you saying the 24-70II is too good for a 7D ? ? ?

kin2son wrote in post #15923532
I believe that's exactly what he's saying

Wow! Ed will be really disappointed in me. I plan on using a 24-70 II on a 60D. Perhaps I should stick to the barnyard?

Tommy1957 wrote in post #15924774
Wow! Ed will be really disappointed in me. I plan on using a 24-70 II on a 60D. Perhaps I should stick to the barnyard?

no I won't. it's your money and it's the best standard zoom made. it just wouldn't be my first choice for a 1.6 crop . do you have a pair of loose fitting rubber boots ?

ed rader wrote in post #15924790
no I won't. it's your money and it's the best standard zoom made. it just wouldn't be my first choice for a 1.6 crop . do you have a pair of loose fitting rubber boots ?

Yes, I have the boots. Leftovers from when my wife volunteered on a dairy farm.

I have, until now, forgone a fast mid-range zoom because I could get by with primes. Changing primes on the sidelines of a basketball/volleyball, etc. game is a bit much. Hence the desire for a zoom. The 24-70 II wouldn't be your first choice. What would?

My thought process summarized:
24-70 II, best hardware going.
24-70 I, same price as Tamron 2.8 VC, no IS, not as good as II.
Tamron VC, slow focus.
Sigma HSM, not a great perfomer, per several reviews.
My second-choice is actually the Tamron 28-75 2.8, but I hate to blow $500 and still end up wanting the 24-70 II. And it doesn't focus very quickly.
EF-s 17-55, two slams: 24-70 range seems to fit better, won't work on my 5D.

Is my logic flawed?

These are rather elitist comments... Barnyard mating... loose fitting rubber boots...

The OP has pretty much covered the range with high quality glass except for the 24-70.

A set with 10-22, 24-70 MkII, 70-200 MkII, 100-400 does rather well.

I can see the recommendation to buy the 5DIII coming, but if he does not wish to spend the $5k+ in one go, he would end up with a seriously challenged lineup 50, 70-200, 100-400...

Unless he decides to keep his crop setup... as well... which kind of defeats the purpose after blowing 5 and a half thousand bucks on a 5dIII and the 24-70...

EDIT: Sorry OP you put in your answer first... Nothing wrong with your reasoning. I am getting there myself...

FYI: I'm not the OP.