Oh what ever shall i do?!?

Heya Guys/Gals,
Ive been running over the ideas of getting a 30D latley with
my father, heres the list we originally cam up with

30D with Kit lens
70-200 F4
Monopod

Heres what we have in mind now
30D (body only)
70-200 F2.8 USM
24-105 F4 IS USM
Monopod

Heres my Question,
Should i be trying to be talking my dad out of getting the 24-105
or should i be really happy that hes thinking about the 24-105?
i know the F2.8 on the 7-20 is a good idea,

Cam:o

It really depends on what you or your dad shoots. The 24-105 can be a great choice or an okay choice depending upon the context. There is no simple answer.

Idealy, that would be a good kit, if you can do that. Prioritze based on need, if the cost is the factor holding you back.

You can't compare the 70-200 2.8 and the 24-105. They do two completely different things.

Cheers for the Reply Grego,
I was thinking about getting something that
doesnt overlap in Focal Length for thats useless in my POV
maybe a 17-85 IS USM might do the trick and get him to put a 430EX on

Cam

QF-347 wrote in post #2180704
Cheers for the Reply Grego,
I was thinking about getting something that
doesnt overlap in Focal Length for thats useless in my POV
maybe a 17-85 IS USM might do the trick and get him to put a 430EX on

Cam

Well, the lens don't necessairly need to be Canon, if you are trying to find a way to shave costs. But then again, it comes down to what you want. If you want a bigger aperture lens, Sigma and Tamron make some. if you want more reach, then that Canon gives you a good amount of reach.

Even if the 24-105 and 70-200 lap, they still don't really conflict.

While I think that the 24-105L would be ideal on a FF camera I went with the 17-85 IS on my 20D and I am loving it. I just needed the extra width.

grego wrote in post #2180690
It really depends on what you or your dad shoots. The 24-105 can be a great choice or an okay choice depending upon the context. There is no simple answer.

Idealy, that would be a good kit, if you can do that. Prioritze based on need, if the cost is the factor holding you back.

You can't compare the 70-200 2.8 and the 24-105. They do two completely different things.

To reiterate what Grego said... I think it depends on you and your dad's shooting needs. My 17-85 IS spends a lot of time on my 30D because of it 's very useful (for me) range. With that said, for what I shoot I'm finding I spend more time in the 24-85 range than I do the 24 and wider range of that lense. If you can afford it, I'd go for the 24-105 over the 17-85. My new 'go-light' kit is my 30D, 17-85, 70-200, & 1.4 TC.

Based on your original question...there is no comparison between the "kit" lens and the 24-105 IS....if your father is willing to go the extra money for the 24-105....then by all means...go for it....it is a great lens...regardless if it is on a 1D, 5D or 30D....