what to do?

Hey everyone
i know there are hundreds of threads like this out there and ive read most of the relevant ones but id like some feedback for my personal situation
currently i own
7d
10-22
10-17 FE
70-200 f4
50 1.8 (bit broken though)
100-400
couple of flashes and an st-e2

i feel as though im missing something. I will be buying a sigma 30mm 1.4 but want another lens to pair it with.

Here are my thoughts so far, its between three lenses 24-105, 24-70, 17-55
ive owned the 24-105 and i like the fact it has IS but the range is a little awkward for me i think.
i like the fact that the 24-70 is a 2.8 im a sucker for BOKEH but im concerned with the lack of IS. However with the sigma i can have my bokeh craving fixed
17-55 im concerned about the build quality and the range.


Basically its going to be used for walkabout and some portraiture and studio work also in night clubs.
I have every other range covered and will be happy with one more lens in my setup.
Im not looking at anything other than these lenses, that means im not looking at any sigma/tamron/tokina substitutes. I can afford any of them but not anything other than them

Might want to update the sig.

Portraits, I would use the 70-200 that you already own. If working in nightclubs, be prepared for manhandling gear or being knocked about. I would recommend the 17-55 because of 1:2.8 but its going to be an issue of do you want something that expensive being knocked about?

I would think about the Tamron 17-50 2.8 in those situations since IS wont do you much good.

tohara wrote in post #9611922
...Basically its going to be used for walkabout and some portraiture and studio work also in night clubs.Im not looking at anything other than these lenses, that means im not looking at any sigma/tamron/tokina substitutes.

First of all, I think that by ignoring third party brands like sigma/tamron/ tokina, you miss a lot of worthy lenses that a) save you dollars and b) give your better quality lenses than what canon has to offer at that price range. I'm talking about the tamron 28-75, and 17-50. There's also the sigma 30, and 50. Tokina has their famous 11-16 which i once had. It's absolutely amazing and it's quite hard to get, making it's resale value quite high for a third party lens.

You could get the 17-55 and pair it with an 11-16 (ultimately selling your 10-22). In that way, you have a constant aperture of f2.8 between 11-55. This is the setup i used to have and i loved it. I looked at the 10-22 but the vignetting at wide apertures at the wide end prevented me from buying it. Most of the time, the 17-55 is taken for granted because of it's build quality and it's range. But its honestly the best lens out of the 3 general purpose lenses because it's sharper than the others, has an f2.8 aperture and it has a worthy 3-stop is system. The lens is sharp even wide open - something that's hard to say with the 24-70. As for the gap between the 55-70, you can ask all of the users who have the 17-55 + 70-200 combo, and most likely, they'll tell you that you wont miss nor even think about the gap.

If you want a prime, you could always look at the 24L II for the 7D. the 24L II gives an effective 38mm focal length which is the perfect compromise between 24mm and 50mm - making it the perfect walk around lens. The wide aperture allows you to shoot in low light, and give a thin DOF look to your pictures, adding a 3D effect to your captures.

I'd get the 17-55, without a doubt.

thanks for your replies

for starters ive done plenty of nightclub work and im very careful and cant say i get knocked around too much.

Im not looking to sell any of the lenses i already have, im very happy with all of them but i need a lens in this focal length. Im already getting the 30mm which will provide me with the bokeh but im not going to spend the ridiculous amount the canon people charge for their red ringed primes.

Basically im shying away from the third party brands because a) im not familiar with them b) they are not available locally and with the exchange rate it wouldn't be worth buying internationally c) ive not had pleasing results from other lenses in their ranges in the past e.g tamron 17-35

so why the 17-55 then? I hear it has some issue with lens flare and dust from the zoom action. For the same money i could get the 24-105 which is an l lens with the build quality that goes along with it, ive owned it before and it will be suitable for an ff which may be on the horizon.

i have not made up my mind yet so please continue with the suggestions im willing to hear anything as long as there is some proof supporting it. i.e not saying 'get the 17-55'

marloon i noticed you've owned all three of the lenses im looking at.
Which was your favourite?

tohara wrote in post #9612097
for starters ive done plenty of nightclub work and im very careful and cant say i get knocked around too much.

Regardless the Tamron 17-50 F/2.8 still comes in at a price that it could get destroyed - then replaced - and still be cheaper than the 17-55 overall.

I see you're in Aus The price will probably be silly, but last I checked my local Harvey Norman had a bunch of Tamron lenses in stock (17-50 included). I've also seen both Tamron and Sigma lenses in numerous Camera House stores. Worth checking at the very least.

like i stated originally im not buying the tamron

Really, just go with the 17-55, you won't regret it.

I'm a bit confused on why you'd need both the 10-22 and the 10-17 FE, I'd get a 10mm f/2.8 fisheye instead of the 10-17, it'd be better for club stuff if you use it there.

i purchased the 10-17 to use in my housing for surf photography, it doesn't communicate with either of my flashes at all though so all the photos tend to be blown out and im not a fan of the distortion it gives night club photos. The 10-22 serves a completely different purpose in my opinion.

im going to a shop tomorrow to have a look at all my options to see which one suits me best.