About to lose my 'L' cherry...

I'm mere hours away from getting my hands on a 24-70L to replace my trusty 17-85.

I've done, and will be doing, weddings and other family events, and with a rented 24-70 used at my last wedding, I figured it's worth it in the end... I'm using it on a 40D, but I think I can live with the loss from 17mm to 24.

Any last words of encouragement??

You're going to regret it, its a huge piece of junk without IS and will leave you frustrated as hell that you can't effectively use the 2.8.

Unless you have a monopod...

:p

Just kidding, it's a huge step up, go wild.

Awwww thats just mean Kajuah

Personally, I'd recommend a 17-55 over a 24-70 on a crop, but sounds like the focal range works well for you, so go for it!

You'll be very happy with it. Once you go "L" you'll never be the same,


Good Luck,

Ron

It's a frigging lens, not sex.

I would be more inclined to suggest the 17-55 f/2.8 IS. Less expensive and better suited for crop sensors.

You should love it mate, on the spec alone, i've been considering getting one my self, in a thread above or below somewhere

form wrote in post #7574576
It's a frigging lens, not sex.

maybe some take it one step too far :>

SurplusCorn wrote in post #7574359
I'm mere hours away from getting my hands on a 24-70L to replace my trusty 17-85.

I've done, and will be doing, weddings and other family events, and with a rented 24-70 used at my last wedding, I figured it's worth it in the end... I'm using it on a 40D, but I think I can live with the loss from 17mm to 24.

Any last words of encouragement??

The 24-70mm is certainly a terriffic lens, but in shooting weddings for a very long time, with three different format cameras from APS-C to medium format, I find the 74 degree AOV to be needed too often for groups in limited areas...17-18mm on APS-C. Why not the 17-55mm f/2.8?

Wilt wrote in post #7574791
The 24-70mm is certainly a terriffic lens, but in shooting weddings for a very long time, with three different format cameras from APS-C to medium format, I find the 74 degree AOV to be needed too often for groups in limited areas...17-18mm on APS-C. Why not the 17-55mm f/2.8?

I'm trying to move away from EF-S lens's. I don't see full frame in my near future, but I've used, and liked, the 24-70 already, and I'd rather invest in a lens that will last me longer if I do decide to go full frame...

SurplusCorn wrote in post #7574867
I'm trying to move away from EF-S lens's. I don't see full frame in my near future, but I've used, and liked, the 24-70 already, and I'd rather invest in a lens that will last me longer if I do decide to go full frame...

Have you got a problem with reselling a lens?
Why make a sacrafice now for something you might do in the future? If an EF-S option is the best offering for what you are doing now, not buying it because you don't want to bothered selling it later makes no sense to me.

Hell, buy a 17-55 used and then if you go full frame in a year you'll be able to sell it for more than it costs you now at the rate prices are going these days. If you are certain of going full frame in a short time period then EF-s lenses don't make sense, otherwise you're just being silly.

Although I have been using standard zooms more than any other lens since I started doing weddings, I am finding with my 85L that most of what can be done with the 24-70L can be done better, and at much greater expense, with a 35L, 85L and two camera bodies. Now, there are just a few instances when that zoom still comes in really handy, like the cake cutting.

I also say get the 17-55 IS. It's the tool you need NOW. Not much cost if and when you ever go full frame to sell it. Some people who go full frame keep their xxD bodies just to keep shooting the 17-55

I agree with pretty much everybody else on this, get the 17-55 IS you will love it on the 40D. I really hated to sell this lens but I was moving to full frame bodies. I will say the 17-55 IS did keep me from moving to full frame sooner.