Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 07 Oct 2007 (Sunday) 11:38
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which would you choose? 17-55 f/2.8 on a 40D vs. 24-70 f/2.8 on a 5D

 
Leonard ­ Wong
Member
Avatar
206 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 07, 2007 11:38 |  #1

I'm picking up photography as a new hobby and I've been borrowing my sister's 300D with a 50mm f/1.8. I want to now buy my own equipment and I'm trying to decide which route I should take. I want to avoid the whole crop vs. FF debate, so I'm moving on to the lens instead. The types of pictures I like to take are (in this order): indoor, outdoor, portraits, landscapes. I have a large extended family, so the indoor shots that I take need a fast lens. The 50mm on a crop, I find is a bit to close and I need a wider angle.

Does anyone have side by side comparisons of the 17-55 on a crop to a 24-70 on a FF? I did read the review on the 17-55 and it mentioned that it was sharper than the 24-70, but wanted more hands on comparison with the two. Putting the money factor aside (especially with the Canon rebates around the corner,) which would you recommend?

TIA for helping me spend my money. :D


40D | 10-22 | 17-55 | 30 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 85 1.8 | 70-200 F4 IS | 2x580EXII | YN CTR-301P | Lowepro Slingshot 200 | Kata R-103 | Manfrotto Monopod 679B
HV20 | WD-H43 | DM-20 | Manfrotto 390RC2
G12 | D10

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
JuZ
Goldmember
Avatar
1,615 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jun 2005
Location: West Sussex, UK
     
Oct 07, 2007 11:41 |  #2

A 5D will make a better job of photos thanks to it's higher resolution and better high ISO performance.


JuZ ;)
My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,322 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 536
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Oct 07, 2007 11:59 |  #3

Leonard Wong wrote in post #4081181 (external link)
I'm picking up photography as a new hobby and I've been borrowing my sister's 300D with a 50mm f/1.8. I want to now buy my own equipment and I'm trying to decide which route I should take. I want to avoid the whole crop vs. FF debate, so I'm moving on to the lens instead. The types of pictures I like to take are (in this order): indoor, outdoor, portraits, landscapes. I have a large extended family, so the indoor shots that I take need a fast lens. The 50mm on a crop, I find is a bit to close and I need a wider angle.

Does anyone have side by side comparisons of the 17-55 on a crop to a 24-70 on a FF? I did read the review on the 17-55 and it mentioned that it was sharper than the 24-70, but wanted more hands on comparison with the two. Putting the money factor aside (especially with the Canon rebates around the corner,) which would you recommend?

TIA for helping me spend my money. :D

i don't have a comparison but i've owned both lenses and both cameras. i don't think there is a wrong choice ... there are advantages and disadvantages each way ... but if you are after superior image quality the 5d + 24-70L is a better choice.

the 5d will give you cleaner prints indoors but the 17-55 IS will be more useful indoors because of the IS and is sharper wide open.

also, the 24mm FOV of the 24-70L + 5d is a big deal to me but the trade-off is on the longer end where the 17-55 will be better for portraits.

you'll also have much better DOF control with the 5d and brick and better bokeh as well as better performance at high ISOs

imo if you have to ask get the 40d and the 17-55.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cathpah
Goldmember
Avatar
4,259 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Maine.
     
Oct 07, 2007 12:03 |  #4

i would say 5d w/ 24-70 wins hands down.


Architecture (external link) | Fashion + Beauty (external link) | Travel (external link) | Mayhem (external link) | Instagram (external link)
tools of the trade
My name is Jeff, and I'm addicted to shadows in fashion and brights in architecture. "Hiiiiii Jeff."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,887 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Oct 07, 2007 12:07 |  #5

No doubt that I would go for the 5D/L combo ... I have a 17-55 IS on a 30D and is a decent lens but plasticky and the L to me pops more. The 5D is arguably the best bang per buck body you can buy. Lovely image quality.


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SaSi
Senior Member
Avatar
472 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Athens, Greece
     
Oct 07, 2007 12:10 |  #6

These two lenses are equivalent in focal ranges on the two bodies you mention. The 24-70 is expected to be a little sharper in the borders, while the 17-55 gives you IS instead. It's up to you to decide which feature is better for you.

While the selection between these two lenses is difficult as their performance is quite close, the two bodies are night and day compared. Of course your point is comparing these two lenses with appropriate bodies so you can utilize equivalent focal lengths, but the two bodies cannot be compared both in terms of price and performance.

The 5D compared to the 400D is almost 3~4 times the cost. I would argue that the 5D is a much better camera but much older and - basically - old fashioned compared to the newer 400D and 40D bodies.

If I was looking for the best value for money in wide-angle - low-light, I would opt for the 40D, saving a hefty amount to spend on one or two better lenses. I would choose the 5D if I knew I was going to shoot high ISO most of the time.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eble
Member
Avatar
52 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: asia-pacific
     
Oct 07, 2007 12:12 as a reply to  @ condyk's post |  #7

you're comparing a ~$3000 (5D + 24-70) and ~$2000 (40D + 17-55) combo :D

go for 5d if it's on your budget :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lungdoc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,101 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2006
Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Canada
     
Oct 07, 2007 12:19 |  #8

One could make the argument that due to DOF and speed advantages of FF a better comparison is the 24-105 IS F4 on FF vs 17-55 2.8 IS on 40D. Both IS; similar effective aperture. In that case I don't think you can beat the range of the 24-105.


Mark
My Smugmug (external link) Eos 7D, Canon G1X II, Canon 15-85 IS, Canon 17-85 IS, Sigma 100-300 EX IF HSM, Canon 50mm 1.8, Canon 85mm 1.8, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Sigma 50-150 2.8, Sigma 1.4 EX DG , Sigma 24-70 F2.8 DG Macro, Canon EF-S 10-22, Canon 430EX,

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amoergosum
Goldmember
1,016 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Germany
     
Oct 07, 2007 12:34 |  #9

lungdoc wrote in post #4081348 (external link)
One could make the argument that due to DOF and speed advantages of FF a better comparison is the 24-105 IS F4 on FF vs 17-55 2.8 IS on 40D. Both IS; similar effective aperture. In that case I don't think you can beat the range of the 24-105.

I am going to purchase the 5D this year....I still have to decide which lens to buy....there were quite a number of forum members who recommended the 24-105 so far...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Leonard ­ Wong
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
206 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 07, 2007 12:34 |  #10

ed rader wrote in post #4081270 (external link)
imo if you have to ask get the 40d and the 17-55.

This is probably the best point. I am leaning more toward the 5D only because I don't want to have to rebuy equipment if I choose to upgrade at a later time.

eble wrote in post #4081318 (external link)
you're comparing a ~$3000 (5D + 24-70) and ~$2000 (40D + 17-55) combo :D

go for 5d if it's on your budget :)

Yes. I was originally planning to go for the 40D, but the Canon rebates for Canada put the 5D comparable budget range. If the USA rebate is similar, that's the reason I'm even considering the 5D. If there was no rebate and the cost difference was $1000, I would've opted for the 40D.

lungdoc wrote in post #4081348 (external link)
One could make the argument that due to DOF and speed advantages of FF a better comparison is the 24-105 IS F4 on FF vs 17-55 2.8 IS on 40D. Both IS; similar effective aperture. In that case I don't think you can beat the range of the 24-105.

ed rader wrote in post #4081270 (external link)
also, the 24mm FOV of the 24-70L + 5d is a big deal to me but the trade-off is on the longer end where the 17-55 will be better for portraits.

Is the 24-105 a better choice? mentally, the 24-70 f/2.8 sounds better, but I am not sure if I should really be concerned.


40D | 10-22 | 17-55 | 30 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 85 1.8 | 70-200 F4 IS | 2x580EXII | YN CTR-301P | Lowepro Slingshot 200 | Kata R-103 | Manfrotto Monopod 679B
HV20 | WD-H43 | DM-20 | Manfrotto 390RC2
G12 | D10

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,322 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 536
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Oct 07, 2007 13:09 |  #11

Leonard Wong wrote in post #4081420 (external link)
This is probably the best point. I am leaning more toward the 5D only because I don't want to have to rebuy equipment if I choose to upgrade at a later time.


Yes. I was originally planning to go for the 40D, but the Canon rebates for Canada put the 5D comparable budget range. If the USA rebate is similar, that's the reason I'm even considering the 5D. If there was no rebate and the cost difference was $1000, I would've opted for the 40D.



Is the 24-105 a better choice? mentally, the 24-70 f/2.8 sounds better, but I am not sure if I should really be concerned.

you're choosing the 5d because of superior IQ?

if so the 24-70L is a better choice. if it's convenience you're after and very good IQ i would get the 24-105L or the 40d and 17-55.

i've owned the 24-70L and 24-105L and the former gives you better DOF control, better FF performance @ 24mm, better bokeh and better overall IQ.

i'm not saying the 24-105L is a slouch and it can do things that the 24-70L can't, but if you are after the best IQ get the 24-70L, imo :D.

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tuan209
Member
236 posts
Joined Apr 2006
Location: Houston
     
Oct 07, 2007 13:24 |  #12

eble wrote in post #4081318 (external link)
you're comparing a ~$3000 (5D + 24-70) and ~$2000 (40D + 17-55) combo :D

go for 5d if it's on your budget :)

That could all change with upcoming rebates. The 5D is 2300 now at BH, and if you throw in a 600 dollar rebate, the price difference wont be so dramatic.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
44,602 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3572
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 07, 2007 13:42 |  #13

You have gotten some good pros and cons of the two bodies, from a technical perspective. Let me give you an insight from a different perspective...the financial one! Unlike film SLRs, with the dSLR you are effectively PREPAYING all of your costs of 'film and processing'. The 5D costs 2x the cost of the 40D. If you intended on keeping both bodies for 2-3 years (before the next generation of cameras render today's cameras 'less desireable'!), and then sell it, assuming that both bodies depreciate 20-25% in that period of time, the 5D depreciation is $200-250 greater than the 40D! If your expected photo volume is not expected to be great, that is more cost per shot to factor into the investment. If you are a professional and can amortize the greater cost, the 5D is a very fine camer; if you are an avid enthusiast, the 5d is a very fine camera; if you are a vacation/family snapshooter, the 40D might be the better camera to buy...very few people ever make larger than 8x10 or 13x19, and it really is at higher magnifications where more pixels becomes more apparent. While the 5D has lower noise than the 30D, with the advances in technology, you need to do your homework before deciding its 'advantage' in noise is worth the delta in cost. If you have lots of disposable income and want it anyway, break a leg!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Leonard ­ Wong
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
206 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Oct 07, 2007 14:15 |  #14

tuan209 wrote in post #4081656 (external link)
That could all change with upcoming rebates. The 5D is 2300 now at BH, and if you throw in a 600 dollar rebate, the price difference wont be so dramatic.

I think that is the topic that I'm really debating. If the costs come within $500, should I just pull the trigger now and get the 5D? or use the 40D until I come to a point where I need to upgrade and then buy the next generation 5D?


40D | 10-22 | 17-55 | 30 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 85 1.8 | 70-200 F4 IS | 2x580EXII | YN CTR-301P | Lowepro Slingshot 200 | Kata R-103 | Manfrotto Monopod 679B
HV20 | WD-H43 | DM-20 | Manfrotto 390RC2
G12 | D10

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,322 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 536
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Oct 07, 2007 14:26 |  #15

Leonard Wong wrote in post #4081905 (external link)
I think that is the topic that I'm really debating. If the costs come within $500, should I just pull the trigger now and get the 5D? or use the 40D until I come to a point where I need to upgrade and then buy the next generation 5D?

if you already have the 40d i'd work with it and wait. the price of the 5d will only get lower and the replacement may be a worthwhile upgrade.

BTW, a few weeks ago the 40d was supposed to be the new IQ king....better than the 5d according to some idiot who used the 40d for a few minutes at a camera show that everyone wanted to believe.

what happened to THAT :D?

ed rader


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,212 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which would you choose? 17-55 f/2.8 on a 40D vs. 24-70 f/2.8 on a 5D
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is 0les4
1094 guests, 223 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.