24-70 vs 17-55 on 7D

I actually sold the 24-70L in favor of the 17-55. I have been extremely happy so far.

mcon17 wrote in post #11001632
I actually sold the 24-70L in favor of the 17-55. I have been extremely happy so far.

What was better with the 17-55??

It really depends on your subjects. If you just want a general walk-around lens, you can't really go wrong with either, but wedding photographers prefer the 17-55 especially for groups because it's wider and has IS.

beerba wrote in post #11001681
What was better with the 17-55??

1. 17mm on a crop is a lot wider than 24.
2. The 17-55 has IS which makes it better when handheld in low light on static subjects.

24-70 on FF
17-55 on Crop

I have the 17-55 but was thinking about selling it for the 24-70. For me its the range gap since my next lens is 70-200. I know both are good lenses and I just wanted to cover all lengths after i also get UWA 10-22. IS is also a plus imho even if its the old mechanism.

EvoSix wrote in post #11003414
I have the 17-55 but was thinking about selling it for the 24-70. For me its the range gap since my next lens is 70-200. I know both are good lenses and I just wanted to cover all lengths after i also get UWA 10-22. IS is also a plus imho even if its the old mechanism.

56-69mm is what you will be missing, just grab a prime for that fill in.

and then grab a 11-16 tokina

Stir Fry A Lot - That's damned funny!!

17-55 IS no doubt. On a crop, it's a fabulous lens. Don't get the brick unless you have a full frame.

Easiest choice in the world, 17-55 on a crop. 17-55 is not the best built but has the best IQ of any zoom lens (minus the 80-200 2.8) I have used.

I got the 17-55 now I need to upgrade to the 7D! I ll get the 24-70 if I ll buy a FF in the future!

Depends what you shoot. 17-55 is a good 'standard' zoom, but that may not be what you're after - if you routinely carry more than one body, for example, 'standard' zooms are usually unnecessary.

For event photography, where you're intermingling in a crowd, it's hard to beat the 24-70 on a crop - an equivalent full-frame field of view of 38mm on the short and 112mm on the long end makes it both wide enough for group shots (the field of view is close enough to 35mm on full frame for this) and long enough for tight portraits.

This is an easy one.

The 17- 55 is good wide but it doesn't have enough reach.
Its made of plastic
It's not weather sealed.

The 24-70 is wide enough and has good reach.
Its made of metal.
It's weather sealed.
Its heavier but its tough.

Therefore its the 24-70 all the way............

Sportidi wrote in post #11006225
This is an easy one.

The 17- 55 is good wide but it doesn't have enough reach.
Its made of plastic
It's not weather sealed.

The 24-70 is wide enough and has good reach.
Its made of metal.
It's weather sealed.
Its heavier but its tough.

Therefore its the 24-70 all the way............

None of which actually matters if the focal length you're after is 17-55 in a single lens.

Besides, there's nothing wrong with plastic - after all, what do you think bulletproof vests are made of?

Hehe, this is going both ways...

Yesterday i was sure of the 24-70, but today......maybe 17-55.

BUT i think its the Brick thats my kind of lens...it might be, maybe:p

Thanx for all the replys.