need to decide between 2 lenses...

[drummerblake777]

[FONT=verdana,Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1] Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

OR

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS

[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=verdana,Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]I'm also about to buy the 400D(xti) & since I'm more than likely not going to spare the extra few hundred for the 30D (or should I?), I want some really good glass. Both of these are in the $1000 range, so price is not a factor when choosing between the two. I know L glass is supposed to be "superior" but then again that f/2.8 is looking mighty attractive with the EF-S. I do have the money for the 24-70mm f/2.8, but that lens is just so darn HUGE. [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=verdana,Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]It's still an option I guess. [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=verdana,Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]As far as range, I really love the wide angles that the EF-S has to offer. But I'll probably cover that when I purchase the sigma 10-20mm in the near future. Right now I'm just debating on which lens to initially pair with my xti. Suggestions? [/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[Iron Flatline]

It's a question of how you shoot. I would go fo the 17-55. The Image Stabilization plus f/2.8 should give you some great bar and restaurant shots.

 

[usayit]

17-55, 24-105, and 24-70 are lenses with completely different applications. As Iron stated, it will be difficult to say one is generally better than the other.

For me, I chose the 24-105mm f4L IS for a general walk around lens paired with a 50mm f1.4 (or f1.8) prime. If you like personal "journalistic" low light zoom, I agree with Iron... 17-55 will be a great zoom.

 

[soylentgreen]

Yeah, it all boils down to what you intend to shoot. I like the 24-105 f/4L IS for the range it offers for a general walk-around lens. I mostly shoot wildlife and nature so the f/4 is fine for outdoor shooting. Indoor with limited light is it's only fault. If you intend to do much of that, go for the faster lens. The 17-55 seems like it will not offer enough on the long end for me as i was use to the 17-85 kit lens. Image quality on the 17-55 f/2.8 is close to L range supposedly. I tried the 24-70 f/2.8 L and must say it is an impressive lens. You will get use to the weight if that is your concern. I tend to like that heft to help me balance and stabilize. Really won't be dissapointed in any of these lenses. Just choose the range and speed you require.

On a side note, will Canon please make a 24-105 f/2.8 L IS already!!! I'm waitin'.