"help me choose a lens" 17-50 2.8, 24-70L 2.8 24-105L

...so it kills me to post this. I'm going to buy a new walk around lens Friday (treating myself for my Birthday) and I've read dozens and dozens of threads, reviews, picture galleries... and I'm no closer to picking between the Canon 17-50 2.8, 24-70L 2.8 and the 24-105L than when I started.

Recap:
17-50 2.8 - The fact that it sucks dust scares me, kills resell value
24-70L - Very expensive, lots of bad copies
24-105L - Many who've owned it say it's poor at 24mm and not really that sharp, only F4

I don't do lots of wide angle stuff, but I do take pics of just about everything else.

I'm usually not this indesicivie and yet, I realize there's been about a thousand threads on this topic, probably because so many others have had the exact same conundrum... maybe I should sell my gear and just start collecting stamps...

Hmm tough one, I'd probably go with the 24-70 of those ones listed.

17-55mm, you can clean it if and when dust bothers you easily. The only time I got dust in my new copy is one speck that got in when I decided to try running it without my Hoya HD protective filter. Put it back on and that still is the only spec of dust in the lens. Obviously it doesn't affect IQ at all and I've kinda stopped caring.

24-105 would be my choice if I was not much of a wide angle guy and liked using an external flash all the time.

Try asking yourself if you want IS and/or f2.8.

If you want both, then 17-55.
If you want f2.8 but do not care about IS, then 24-70.
If you want IS but do not care about f2.8, then 24-105.

Does that help?

If not, then think about how you would use whatever lens you get. Is it mainly for indoor, outdoor, or both? I like 17-50 range for indoor, but find 24-105 a good lens for outdoor. If 50/50 indoor/outdoor, then maybe 24-70 is the answer.

Does that help?

If not, then just flip a coin to decide between two of the three, and then again with the winner of the first flip and the third lens.

I'd go with the 17-55 f/2.8 IS

It's got 2.8, it's got IS, and it's got a great range for a crop body.

I wouldn't worry about dust, if it gets that bad just send it in to be cleaned.

Well I would not make dust the deciding factor nor would I go by rumors of all the bad 24-70's. Seriously these are the top 3 midrange zooms out today so there must be a good reason. Ask your self this. 1. do you plan to go full frame anytime soon? if not get a Tamron or Canon 17-XX. 2. If you do plan on full frame decide what you value more. 2.8 vs IS more range.

Its a hard call and there is no right answer because they are all very good but all have trade offs.

i was on the same dilemma a few months back. I eventually decided to get the Canon 24-70 over the Canon 17-55. IMHO you wouldn't go wrong with either of the two but I know a lot of people here disagrees with that. But again, it depends on what you're shooting and future plans with it. I just picked up a 5Dc yesterday and my 24-70 just found a better home.

tempest68 wrote in post #10960106
Try asking yourself if you want IS and/or f2.8.

If you want both, then 17-55.
If you want f2.8 but do not care about IS, then 24-70.
If you want IS but do not care about f2.8, then 24-105.


Does that help?...

Actually it does, quite a bit... seems obvious (you that you point it out), but it really is about 2.8 vs. IS. I guess I'd choose IS. So.... I'm getting the 24-105!

You forgot a lens that should be considered, the 15-85 IS

On a crop-sensor camera to me the choice is 17-55 f/2.8 IS or 15-85 IS...17-55 is if you shoot indoors primarily and 15-85 if you shoot outside primarily...Simple as that

The 24-105 is alright, but its not really a 7D-lens to me, its a 5D one...the range of either 24-70 or 24-105 is pretty limiting, you may not think you want wide on there until you need it, and then it becomes pretty important

KenjiS wrote in post #10960196
You forgot a lens that should be considered, the 15-85 IS...

Check his gear list. He already owns a 17-85 IS (I think he means 15-85 IS).

ScullenCrossBones wrote in post #10960295
Check his gear list. He already owns a 17-85 IS (I think he means 15-85 IS).

This will be replacing my 17-85 IS

You should at least look into the 15-85. its cheaper and from what I have read is a pretty good lens.

I'd actually reccommend 24-105. But since you have a crop sensor, forget about it.
Go for 17-50.
Doesn't matter if it sucks dust. It can produce nice pictures.

after owning 2 105s and 2 bricks I still own one of my 105s and only sold the other one cause I need money. Both of my copies have been sharp at all focal lengths wide open.

virsago_mk2 wrote in post #10960344
I'd actually reccommend 24-105. But since you have a crop sensor, forget about it.
Go for 17-50.
Doesn't matter if it sucks dust. It can produce nice pictures.

I just went through a bunch of "event" pictures I took and only a couple were wider than 24mm; not sure I need the wide end, but if I do need it I suppose I could keep my 17-85...