Why do I still lust after the Canon 24-70?

Toby · 13-03-2011, 19:43

I currently have the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 which I love. It's a superb bit of glass with a good range on a crop, constant f/2.8, IS and it's sharp.

So why do I still lust after the 24-70?

It's not that I'm an "L whore" - I'm perfectly happy with the quality of the 17-55 and honestly think it's effectively an "L" in all but name.

I suppose my only real criticisms of the 17-55 are the slightly lacklustre build quality compared to genuine "L" lenses and the lack of weather sealing, both of which the 24-70 would address, so maybe this is it.

The difference in range between the two lenses doesn't matter that much to me as I have a 10-22 to cover the wide end the 24-70 lacks and the 15mm gap between the 17-55 and my 70-200 is never really a problem.

The question is, whilst the 24-70 would give me the build quality and weather sealing, would I miss the IS?

In an ideal world, the three main things I want from a walkabout are f/2.8, IS and build/weather-sealing. At present Canon simply don't do a lens with all three. The 17-55 lacks the build/sealing, the 24-70 lacks the IS and the 24-105 lacks the f/2.8.

A 24-70 IS has been in the offing for years but, if and when it ever arrives, I fear a £1500+ price tag

13-03-2011, 19:43	#1
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	Why do I still lust after the Canon 24-70? I currently have the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 which I love. It's a superb bit of glass with a good range on a crop, constant f/2.8, IS and it's sharp. So why do I still lust after the 24-70? It's not that I'm an "L whore" - I'm perfectly happy with the quality of the 17-55 and honestly think it's effectively an "L" in all but name. I suppose my only real criticisms of the 17-55 are the slightly lacklustre build quality compared to genuine "L" lenses and the lack of weather sealing, both of which the 24-70 would address, so maybe this is it. The difference in range between the two lenses doesn't matter that much to me as I have a 10-22 to cover the wide end the 24-70 lacks and the 15mm gap between the 17-55 and my 70-200 is never really a problem. The question is, whilst the 24-70 would give me the build quality and weather sealing, would I miss the IS? In an ideal world, the three main things I want from a walkabout are f/2.8, IS and build/weather-sealing. At present Canon simply don't do a lens with all three. The 17-55 lacks the build/sealing, the 24-70 lacks the IS and the 24-105 lacks the f/2.8. A 24-70 IS has been in the offing for years but, if and when it ever arrives, I fear a £1500+ price tag __________________