Opinions, please ...

I'm thinking of purchasing a 50D with a 17-40L. I will be using it to record my "special needs" granddaughter's life. Lots of indoor photos with bounced flash or, lighting permitting, no flash. I'm fairly steady so I don't need IS. My current kit is an XSi which will be kept as a second body with 18-55 IS and 50mm 1.8 II. Frankly, I can focus the XSi better manually, especially with the 50mm, but would prefer an accurate autofocus for quick snaps. I considered the 17-85 IS but found the pictures posted on this forum a bit soft. The 17-40 seems to produce better images. Thanks for your opinions.

I'm sure that the 50D will be able to do everything that you want, and then some. The 17-40 is a great lens, but since you said that you'd like to shoot with natural light as well, I'd look to a zoom that is a constant 2.8. I cannot use mine reliably indoors without flash, even at ISO 1600. Some lenses to consider would be the Tamron 17-50 or Canon 17-55 IS.

Good luck capturing all those images of her life.

I have the 24-105L IS and it hasn't been off off my camera yet. I mainly use it to take pictures of my kids so it might be worth considering.

I am also looking to get the 17-40L at some point as well and think the 50D combination would be great.

I'm sure the 50D will be a great body, but if you want indoor shots with available light, I'd consider something faster than a 4.0 lens. I used my 4.0 zooms indoors but found them too restrictive. That was one of the reasons I've started to purchase fast primes. For me, they provide more flexiblility in tough lighting conditions and the IQ and bokeh of a fast lens is usually better than a 4.0 zoom.

hrm i couldnt help but also recommend a faster general purpose lens... if its got to be f4 at least with IS but your options with L's are limited - otherwise id recommend looking at the 17-55 2.8 IS

I wouldnt say so if you didnt stipulate 'alot' of indoors... if it were standard general purpose id definantly say 17-85 or 17-40...

although you do have your prime as backup, f2.8 AND IS really are exactly suited to what you are asking. It may not be an L but i have heard most people absolutley cant complain. I know you say you dont need IS but on fly shots of kids at 1/30 are possible with IS and pretty much not without... not tack sharp anyways (yeah i know they gotta stay still - but ive had experience at this with a 18month old)

just some food for thought - not sure if you were asking for opinions or comments or backup... no stress just some ideas..

take care, Nicko

I'm going to suggest a faster lens too. I am not sure why you feel you need a new body though (you didn't state why, only that you wanted to get the 50D).

I have both the 17-40 F4L & the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS. The 17-55 is my primary lens. It pretty much stays on the camera (40D) and gets all kinds of use. It does have a problem with letting dust inside of it, but it doesn't affect the IQ. I put the 17-40 aside when I bought the 17-55 as I planned on eBaying it. I forgot to sell it and have actually broken it out a couple times in the past few weeks, for outside shots.

I've used the 17-40 indoors a few times with flash and it works. However, the 17-55 is much better suited for this kind of use.

Im asking more to learn than anything else, but at that focal length and the help of flash why would you need is?

The OP states that there are shots where he would like to not use flash. IS is very helpful in these situations

get the 35 f 1.4 and be happy, capturing those special moments.

I thought he meant "no flash" if there was enough light or flash if there wasnt.
but whatever...for the op heres a thought I use the sig 24-70 in house all the time taking pics of my cats. If auto focus speed is what your main question is about than just focus using the center point. Its near instantanious. So now you just need to pick whatever lense suits your fancy

If you want to save a bit of money and get a nice little lens try the 50mm 1.8, its not expensive and personally I think it does a pretty great job. Although working indoors you might opt for the 35mm instead due to the 50D's crop factor.

35 1.4 is an awesome lens, u can shoot it in the dark!

Thanks everyone for your comments and advice. It's really appreciated. The reason I didn't seriously consider the 17-55 or 17-85 is the EF-S notation-I also have an EOS film camera. Primes would be a great alternative. However, both our house and her parents' house are small so using the legs as a zoom alternative isn't practical. Again, I have no aversion to using flash so existing light photo opportunities would be limited to strong window light and a reflector or a pinch of fill flash. As to the suggestion of purchasing a 50mm 1.8 II-"Already got one" (Monty Python). Thanks again for your thoughts everyone.

I too suggest the 17-55. It's the best general purpose lens for your camera... period. I know you have a film EOS but with your 50D around, how much use are you actually getting out of it? Be honest. Because I don't see the benefit of handicapping your primary camera that sees the most use, just for the odd time that you might want to snap a few with your film camera. The extra stop of speed, the extra range on the long end, and IS all are great advantages. You seem to want to buy the 'second best' lens for your primary setup. I'd say, just get the 17-55, and add a 'second best' lens to your 'second best' camera. Something cheaper and affordable like the 28-105. Sell the 18-55 to help fund it.

A fast prime lens is really the best way to capture people indoors without a flash. Although for cropped-sensor cameras only, the Sigma 30/1.4 is excellent and not too expensive. The 35/1.4, 24/1.4, or even 35/2 would also be very good. Not being able to zoom in and out isn't as limiting as you might think.

If you still want a zoom and you absolutely want to avoid non-full-frame lenses, a 24-70/2.8 will be a better choice than a 17-40 for your purposes. You can always use the kit lens for wider shots when you need them.