Walk around Lens recommendation

[TonyUSA]

I am looking for a walk around lens for my Canon 50D. I was looking at EF24-105 f/4 IS USM and EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS USM. Say if the price is about the same, which would you buy. My other lens is 70-200.

Thank you,

 

[gossamer88]

The 17-55 f/2.8. The 24-105 would not be wide enough on a crop. You should also consider the 18-135 STM.

 

[TonyUSA]

Thank you. Forgot got mention, I want to get a good decent quality picture too. Just got 70-200 IS II and like it so much and don't even want to use my EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM anymore due the picture quality when compare to my new 70-200 2.8 IS.

 

[TonyUSA]

Also looking at 24-70 f4 L lens and 24-105 f4 L lens, on Canon web site both are the same price at $1,000. But on eBay 24-105 average is $600 and 24-70 is $750.

Anyone that had experience with these lens please fill in. Why is a big gap on eBay between the two? Is it because of the demand that 24-70 is more popular than 24-105 or over all better quality lens?

 

[ronlane]

The 24-105 f/4 is basically the Canon full frame kit lens. I have shot with it and actually want it as my walk around lens (upgrade from the 28-135 kit lens for the 7D). The 24-70 is supposed to be a good lens as well but you will need to use your feet to zoom to get as closer than you could with the 24-105.

At the same price, I would probably take the 24-105, but that is just me.

 

[Dao]

For walk around, I like my Tamron standard zoom lens which cover 17-50mm. But of course, it vary from person to person. There are people use the 70-200mm range as their walk around.

 

[TonyUSA]

Thank you. More comments welcome.

 

[wyogirl]

My walk around lens is the Tamron 28-75 2.8. I use a crop and the only time I wish for wider is when I'm doing indoor photos.

 

[TonyUSA]

Thank you.

 

[beagle100]

Also looking at 24-70 f4 L lens and 24-105 f4 L lens, on Canon web site both are the same price at $1,000. But on eBay 24-105 average is $600 and 24-70 is $750.

Anyone that had experience with these lens please fill in. Why is a big gap on eBay between the two? Is it because of the demand that 24-70 is more popular than 24-105 or over all better quality lens?

don't look at ebay prices!
but those lens are oriented more towards full frame models and not crop (like your 50D)
for a "walk around" look at the Sigma 17-50 2.8 HSM OS
or maybe the 18-135 STM

 

[bratkinson]

Not long after I got my 60D, I determined I wanted to go to full frame one day having come from 35mm slide photography 15 years previous. When I had the money, I replaced the 18-135 USM I had with a 24-105 f4L. The improvement in image quality was noticeable. However, I missed the extra 'width' and 'reach' of the 18-135, but I got accustomed to it. I still think the 18-135 is a fantastic all-around single lens solution on a crop sensor such as the nnD series of Canon cameras. Granted, the 24-105 f4L is not the level of image quality your 70-200 L can produce, but with micro focus adjustment on your camera, the results are very satisfactory.

When I needed a 'wider view' than what the 24 end of the lens could provide on the 60D (38mm equivalent), I ended up buying a 16-35 f2.8L to handle.

Some might think the 24-70 F2.8L or f4L would be a good end-to-end focal length 'match' to the 70-200, and it is. However, for a single-lens walk around, I value the ability to get the added reach of the 24-105 when needed over a very minimal loss of IQ. Whether shooting indoor events at church, railroads, cityscapes, or vacation photography, the 24-105 is on my camera 80% or more of the time. Also, my preference is overlapping zoom-ranges, so my 'magic trio' is 16-35, 24-105, and 80-200 (predecessor of your 70-200). That way, I don't have to change lenses when I need only a bit 'more zoom' one way or another.

Oh, and I finally did move up to full frame a couple years almost 3 years ago.

 

[snerd]

Hands-down the Canon EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS USM. And it's now also $200 cheaper than what I paid for it a couple of years ago! Always gave me nice, clear, sharp and colorful photos, and the IS is great for my shaky old hands.

 

[gckless]

Are you set on a zoom? Obviously everyone shoots differently, and a fast prime is better for me, though it may not be for you. I love 35mm, and you can snag a f/1.4 for under $500, or f/1.8 for even cheaper.

 

[tgalloway]

I'm very happy with my Sigma 24-70/2.8 EXDG. My Canon L was stolen a few years back and I stepped down into this Sigma, but I don't feel my shots stepped down at all. It's not waterproof, AF is a hair slower and a hint louder. But image clarity is there and it doesn't cost what an L costs.

 

[TonyUSA]

Thank you Thank you Thank you for all suggestions. Only one reason that I bought 70-200 IS and need other walk around lens is to take my kids photos. He is in swimming and stating to go to swim meet. So I was thinking to buy other lens to take pics when we go to Disneyland, Universal studio, take some pics at school, and etc. One of my friend told me to check out Sigma 18-35 f/1.8., don't know if the range is too small.