Decided on my New Lenses!!! Thanks to ALL.

Good choices! You did your homework well and obviously solved the dilemma "24-105 f/4L IS vs. 24-70 f/2.8".

I'm pretty sure I didn't solve the dilemma between the two lenses, I simply listened to the people with lots of experience on this forum and followed there advice. From what I understand the 24-105 is a great lens as well. Tiger Woods could beat half the pros with a hockey stick. So I believe the equipment is only as good as the photographer, as with anything you do. Thanks for your post Ebann.

Now all you have to do is practice, practice, practice.

That is exactly right!!!!

Thank you for your advise bobthefish, i will use it for landscape pictures and also for some racing pictures.
Do you guys think a 70-300 or a 100-400 is good for that?

TUBBY wrote in post #3506557
I think anything under $10,000 will not produce the desired results.

That's helpful

Tubby could come off a little hard but on this one he does have a good point.

If this person really is new to photography going all out on a 70-200mm F2.8 IS and 24-70 F2.8 really dosen't seem like a very wise move at all. He has a good camera in the 30D and should probably stick to something like a 17-85mm IS which is by no means a bad lens, find out if he really likes the hobby and wants to stick with it.

Once he knows if he wants to stick with photography for the long term then go all out and get the 24-70 70-200mm combo and throw a 300mm F2.8 IS in there for the fun in the mean time he can get his skills up and see if this hobby is really for him.

On the other hand if he has money to blow and it's no object then go for it and while you are there can you send me a 300mm F2.8 and 500mm F4 that will sort out all my problems of having to choose only one for now

Flickster wrote in post #3506623
Tubby could come off a little hard but on this one he does have a good point.

If this person really is new to photography going all out on a 70-200mm F2.8 IS and 24-70 F2.8 really dosen't seem like a very wise move at all. He has a good camera in the 30D and should probably stick to something like a 17-85mm IS which is by no means a bad lens, find out if he really likes the hobby and wants to stick with it...

Why on earth should the OP have to "train" on inferior equipment if he can afford the good stuff? Also, If he decides this isn't for him, he'll be able to sell these lenses at almost no loss anyway, so that's a moot point.

On the other hand, unless weight/size/obviousnes​s is a problem, it isn't too much of a burden to own the 24-70 and the 70-200/2.8 IS. There is no problem finding new homes for them.

It should also be noted that what is considered expensive for one user may not be expensive for someone else. Who has said that life is fair?

The biggest problem here is if the two lenses are "the" lenses to use. If the original need would require the 70-200 to always be used with a 2x TC, then it obviously would not be the best choice. If a lot of requirements are for something wider than 24mm, then the 24-70 will be lacking.

Space wrote in post #3505446
Now all you have to do is practice, practice, practice.

I would work more on that first.
Spending big bucks and practising +- well okay.
I guess as long as you don't get "the" results you can surmise its still you.

prime80 wrote in post #3506648
Why on earth should the OP have to "train" on inferior equipment if he can afford the good stuff? Also, If he decides this isn't for him, he'll be able to sell these lenses at almost no loss anyway, so that's a moot point.

It is not about training on inferior equipment. The 30D and other less expensive lenses will still give great shots and be far from the limiting factor for someone new to photography, skill would be more an issue there, like it would have been for us all.

It is about using common sense when going into something new just like other things in life. Sure I can afford to buy a 300mm F2.8 IS,500mm F4 IS and 600mm F4 IS tomorrow if I feel like it, will I go out and do it... hell no and do you know why... common sense. If photography was my bread and butter then sure I would do it but it's not so i'll limit myself to one of them lenses per year and in 3 or so years i'll have them all, well... maybe not the 600mm the 500mm will be enough

I have no idea about the second hand lens market so if people in the know say that you can sell the 70-200 IS and 24-70 for very little lose then it doesn't sound like such a bad idea and I would say go for it, if on the other hand you stand to lose a good amount of cash if it turns out this is not for you, then it's not so good.

You make it sound like starting out on anything but the very best is a crime, sorry to say but there is nothing wrong with it, if anything it is the smart thing to do unless you are 100% this hobby is the one for you.Like I said before at the start it is hardly going to be your equipment that is the limiting factor.

Flickster wrote in post #3506756
It is not about training on inferior equipment. The 30D and other less expensive lenses will still give great shots and be far from the limiting factor for someone new to photography, skill would be more an issue there, like it would have been for us all.

It is about using common sense when going into something new just like other things in life. Sure I can afford to buy a 300mm F2.8 IS,500mm F4 IS and 600mm F4 IS tomorrow if I feel like it, will I go out and do it... hell no and do you know why... common sense. If photography was my bread and butter then sure I would do it but it's not so i'll limit myself to one of them lenses per year and in 3 or so years i'll have them all, well... maybe not the 600mm the 500mm will be enough

Common sense in this case is strictly based on what the OP can afford. If it's no problem for him to afford good glass, then common sense tells me he should get the good glass to start with instead of wasting money on glass he'll get rid of soon.

Flickster wrote in post #3506756
I have no idea about the second hand lens market so if people in the know say that you can sell the 70-200 IS and 24-70 for very little lose then it doesn't sound like such a bad idea and I would say go for it, if on the other hand you stand to lose a good amount of cash if it turns out this is not for you, then it's not so good.

I have a very good idea of the second hand lens market since that's where I've bought almost all of my lenses. The OP would take a minimal loss selling those two lenses.

Flickster wrote in post #3506756
You make it sound like starting out on anything but the very best is a crime, sorry to say but there is nothing wrong with it, if anything it is the smart thing to do unless you are 100% this hobby is the one for you.Like I said before at the start it is hardly going to be your equipment that is the limiting factor.

Holy putting words in my mouth, Batman! How on earth did you come to that conclusion from my post??? I started on a kit lens and have progressed through quite a bit of consumer grade stuff to get to what I have now, which is STILL not as good as what the OP is getting. And I'll tell you one thing, I would have loved to have been able to start out with the equipment that the OP is using. For me, common sense dictated I couldn't afford it. For the OP, that doesn't seem to be the problem. Please actually read my post before labeling me a gear snob.

Unnecessary arguing on what a stranger should spend his/her money on? Classic!

You have a much desired combo and you will be amazed at the quality when looking through your viewfinder. Have fun!

You have made perfect choices, esp. if your young, you have the rest of your life to practice with these lenses. These lens can inspire you to become more creative and really enjoy this hobby. So long as they are decent or good copies, if the pics don't turn out well you will know that it was you and not the equipment. The 2.8 is much better for indoors than the f/4 lenses. The f/4 line of zoom lenses are lighter and smaller than the F/2.8. But if you want to take photos inside or outdoors at dawn and dusk you will be glad you have the 2.8 lenses. You can eventually get a 50 or 35 mm prime for indoors without a flash. and from those three you can expand to the super teles if you latter have an intrest for wildlife photography, etc..
With zooms its hard not to be satisfied with 2.8.......Enjoy