24-70 Cannon L vs 17-85cannon

[BLD_007]

Canon | Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L | 8014A002

vs

Canon | EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Autofocus Lens | 9517A002BA



I have the 18-85mm and I'm thinking about going to the 24-70mm. It is worth it? I lose my range of 17-85 to 24-70 but I getter a better fstop and lense. But is it worth the 1200 since I already have a lens that does the same thing or do it?


Let me know, thanks!

 

[Hobbes]

I upgraded from 17-85 IS USM to 24-70L about a month ago and I am very happy with my new lens. Not only you get a sharper lens with much wider and constant maximum aperture but also a lens that produce better colors and contrast and of course weather sealing. The only thing I wish I would like to have in this lens is an Image stabilizer otherwise it's totally worth buying.

heres a review on ef 24-70L
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens Review

 

[Big Mike]

since I already have a lens that does the same thing or do it?

A Hyundai also does the same thing that a Mercedes does.

As mentioned, the 24-70mm F2.8 L, is a top quality lens. The image quality is very good. Having a wider aperture is also very nice, but it's the image (and overall) quality that you are paying for. Plus a little bit of prestige...many consider L lenses to be a status symbol of sorts.

You would loose some range, but I think the worst part, would be loosing the wide end. For me, 24mm on a crop sensor camera, is just not wide enough for a 'normal' lens.
That's why I'll suggest that you have a look at the EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS. It's not an 'L' lens, but most people say that the image quality is on par with most L lenses.

 

[cfusionpm]

You would loose some range, but I think the worst part, would be loosing the wide end. For me, 24mm on a crop sensor camera, is just not wide enough for a 'normal' lens.
That's why I'll suggest that you have a look at the EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS. It's not an 'L' lens, but most people say that the image quality is on par with most L lenses.

Yeah, I have both the 17-85 and 17-55 2.8 IS and it is a fantastic lens. CA and sharpness is much better than the 17-85. It has a more usable range on a crop body and still slightly cheaper than the 24-70 2.8 and has included IS in a more compact, lighter weight lens. I have been very pleased with it and was worth the money to upgrade.

 

[Hobbes]

A Hyundai also does the same thing that a Mercedes does.

sorry for the OT but I just dont get why you North Americans are so obsessed with German cars Quality wise they are pieces of crap compared to the newer Toyota and Honda cars and I am pretty sure you can get all the features in a Mercedes in those Japanese and American cars while it is impossible to modify the ef-s 17-85 lens into a L lens

The reason why I didn't consider the 17-55 IS is because it's an ef-s lens and I hope and want to upgrade to a full frame in the future so maybe the OP is thinking the same? idk lol

 

[Big Mike]

It's not necessarily about features...it's about luxury and often, some other intangible qualities.
I could have said..."a $20,000 car does the same basic things that a $100,000 car does. So why does anybody buy a $100,000 car?"

 

[cfusionpm]

The reason why I didn't consider the 17-55 IS is because it's an ef-s lens and I hope and want to upgrade to a full frame in the future so maybe the OP is thinking the same? idk lol

And that's all well and good too. I had a similar thread a while ago when looking for upgrades for my medium zoom. I was torn between 24-105 f/4 IS and the 24-70 2.8 when someone suggested the 17-55. I will probably get a FF camera at come point, but I needed to buy a lens I could use right now. 24mm is not very wide at all, plus one lacked IS while the other lacked f/2.8 while the EF-S had both. I will buy for the camera I have now, not the one I might buy at some unknown point in my purchasing future. But that's just my take on it.

 

[BLD_007]

I shoot with a cannon 50d. I hear full frame cameras are not good for sports because of slower shutter.

will the 24-70 still be for my liking?

 

[Big Mike]

I shoot with a cannon 50d. I hear full frame cameras are not good for sports because of slower shutter.

Depends on the model. Canon's 'sports' camera is the 1D mkIV. It's not quite a full frame sensor, but it's larger than the one in your 50D. It shoots at 10 fps. The Nikon D700 is full frame and it's pretty fast as well.

will the 24-70 still be for my liking?

Take your current lens and put it at 24mm. Is that wide enough for you?

 

[Hobbes]

hehe you guys forgot to mention the new 7D

I am pretty anal about dust particles inside the lens which both 17-85 and 17-55 have issues with. I know my current camera is not weather sealed either but I believe most of the dust get into the lens through the lens it self. If 24mm isn't wide enough then you may want to get a 10-20 something lens as well or take a look at the new EF-S 15-85 f3.5-5.6 IS USM which seems to be a very good walk around lens for APS-C cameras. It's almost as sharp as L lenses and 17-55 but has narrower max aperture.

Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens Review