Canon 17-55 F2.8 or 24-70 f2.8 or. 24--105f2.8

[muskaan911]

Need to buy an lens that i can carry for everyday anyday photography.. Pl suggest which 3 of these is a desirable product..

Sent from my iPad using PhotoForum

 

[weepete]

Crop or FF?

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Don't think Canon makes a 24-105 2.8. They do make a 24-105 f4 L.

 

[weepete]

Was thinking that myself but cba looking it up. In that case its the 24-70L no contest.

 

[muskaan911]

I have FF as well crop..

Sent from my iPad using PhotoForum

 

[bratkinson]

I'm very partial to my 24-105 f4L. It's my 'main lens' for everything I do. Yes, there's times when I want to go wider, so that's my 16-35 f2.8. And when I want longer, it's 80-200 f2.8. But in general, the 24-105 is used for perhaps 80% or more of my photography. There are those who will pooh-pooh the f4, but after having had a 24-70 f2.8L 'the brick', the lighter weight and IS of the 24-105 outweigh the slight sharpness improvement and 1 stop of light the 24-70 offers.

I used both on my 60D when I owned it and liked the results. In my mind, the crop sensor gets its light from the center area of the projected image from the lens. That's the sharpest, least CA, least difraction, eg, 'best' area of the image. Today have have only the 24-105 (plus 3 other Ls) and a 5D3, and it's still my favorite lens.

 

[iolair]

While it only works on a crop body (which may be reason enough to discount it), the 17-55 f/2.8 is an absolutely brilliant lens - great sharpness across the frame, contrast, colour rendition, autofocus speed, image stabiliser - I couldn't find fault with it; I used it for a wedding a few weeks back and it was the perfect workhorse.

 

[Juga]

While it only works on a crop body (which may be reason enough to discount it), the 17-55 f/2.8 is an absolutely brilliant lens - great sharpness across the frame, contrast, colour rendition, autofocus speed, image stabiliser - I couldn't find fault with it; I used it for a wedding a few weeks back and it was the perfect workhorse.

I disagree. The times I have used the 17-55 f2.8 it has given me 'wonky' horizon lines and at times appeared less sharp than the 18-55 kit lens. The question is very subjective and this is just my opinion but from my experience I would NEVER suggest the 17-55 f2.8 for that type of money.

I love my 24-105 f/4L and provides great value. Much more reach, moisture and dust resistant, still maintaining a good constant aperture, and often times you can find it cheaper than the 17-55.

 

[rgregoryb]

If you have FF and crop I would eliminate the 17-55, I have the 24-105 and like it a lot. I would want the lens to work on both bodies.

 

[Danmunro_nz]

Another vote for 17-55 f2.8. I have one on my 7D and its simply brilliant.

 

[RedRobin]

This video may help decisions:



I'm going for the 24-105mm f/4L IS USM as a general purpose lens but so much depends on the type of photography someone wants to do.