efs 17-55 2.8 IS vs ef 24-105L 4 IS

Matblack · 19-09-2010, 20:27

Hmmmmmm

I took delivery of the 24-105mm on Saturday, I bought it on a whim really and it has caused me a dliema with regard to keeping it and if so whether it needs a 5D to do it justice.

I can't really say if it is better than the 17-55 on a crop, there is no doubt that it is sharp as a tack, I think the shot below show it's potential but does the L build and extra length win over the width and speed of the 17-55 I just don't know.

What I can say is that to me it was worth it just for the picture below but I'm sat here scratching my head as to what to do with it

MB

Matblack · 19-09-2010, 20:30

Oh

and the 100mm 2.8 macro is pretty good too

MB

Toby · 21-09-2010, 23:08

I have the 17-55 on my 40D whilst a mate has the 24-105 on his 7D. Don't think there's much in it in terms of quality tbh - just a case of the differing ranges and f/2.8 versus L build quality. Do think the 24-105 would be more at home on a 5D though

Personally the 24-105 would overlap my 70-200 a bit too much for comfort so, if I ever went FF, it'd have to be the 24-70.

Mondo · 22-09-2010, 01:21

The question is not whether you want the 5D, it is whether you prefer the 17-55 or 24-105.

The answer to that is what camera you will get after it.

The good news is that camera gear don't depreciate much so it doesn't cost as much as you think to switch over.

Matblack · 22-09-2010, 09:26

Yep agreed, thats why I didn't mind parking the cost of the lens for a few weeks whilst I decide which one, interest rates suck at the moment so I don't mind parking some savings in some hardware and taking the very small hit in depreciation. Unfortunately bodies seem to depreciate more than lenses which makes me a little less inclinded to just go and buy a 5D Mkii although by God it's tempting

As far as which one I like more, right now I'm leaning towards the 24-105mm, it just feels nicer, I haven't taken enough shots with them to really compare the quality yet, however there is something about the shot I posted above which makes me think the 24-105mm is something special.

MB

Mondo · 22-09-2010, 14:06

If you like the 24-105, try the 24-70, the extra stop gives it even nicer bokeh.

24-70 + FF = dream.

Matblack · 22-09-2010, 14:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mondo

If you like the 24-105, try the 24-70, the extra stop gives it even nicer bokeh.

24-70 + FF = dream.

LOL

I can't justify spending £700 on a 5D classic and you're recomending a £700 lens to go with the classic. I bet it's a great lens Mondo but it's just so far out of my range at the moment

MB

Mondo · 22-09-2010, 15:09

I will show you at piggy's wedding, you can have a play with it all during the break

Mine is soooo sharp now it can cut razor wires. But that won't help you not wanting one though.....

Back on topic....keep the 24-05 a bit more, see how you can on with it, shoot different subjects too.

Toby · 22-09-2010, 21:30

I've lusted after the 24-70 for years. I thought the 17-55 would put an end to that lust but, whilst it has to a large degree, I still sometimes wonder whether to trade up.

On the plus side, it would give me the full L build quality that the current lens lacks, plus the focal length actually fits better as I have a 10-22 and 70-200. It also makes any eventual transition to FF easier.

On the downside, I'd lose the IS (and a couple of hundred quid).

19-09-2010, 20:27	#1
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	efs 17-55 2.8 IS vs ef 24-105L 4 IS Hmmmmmm I took delivery of the 24-105mm on Saturday, I bought it on a whim really and it has caused me a dliema with regard to keeping it and if so whether it needs a 5D to do it justice. I can't really say if it is better than the 17-55 on a crop, there is no doubt that it is sharp as a tack, I think the shot below show it's potential but does the L build and extra length win over the width and speed of the 17-55 I just don't know. What I can say is that to me it was worth it just for the picture below but I'm sat here scratching my head as to what to do with it MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

19-09-2010, 20:30	#2
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	Oh and the 100mm 2.8 macro is pretty good too MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

21-09-2010, 23:08	#3
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	I have the 17-55 on my 40D whilst a mate has the 24-105 on his 7D. Don't think there's much in it in terms of quality tbh - just a case of the differing ranges and f/2.8 versus L build quality. Do think the 24-105 would be more at home on a 5D though Personally the 24-105 would overlap my 70-200 a bit too much for comfort so, if I ever went FF, it'd have to be the 24-70. __________________

22-09-2010, 01:21	#4
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	The question is not whether you want the 5D, it is whether you prefer the 17-55 or 24-105. The answer to that is what camera you will get after it. The good news is that camera gear don't depreciate much so it doesn't cost as much as you think to switch over. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

22-09-2010, 09:26	#5
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	Yep agreed, thats why I didn't mind parking the cost of the lens for a few weeks whilst I decide which one, interest rates suck at the moment so I don't mind parking some savings in some hardware and taking the very small hit in depreciation. Unfortunately bodies seem to depreciate more than lenses which makes me a little less inclinded to just go and buy a 5D Mkii although by God it's tempting As far as which one I like more, right now I'm leaning towards the 24-105mm, it just feels nicer, I haven't taken enough shots with them to really compare the quality yet, however there is something about the shot I posted above which makes me think the 24-105mm is something special. MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

22-09-2010, 14:06	#6
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	If you like the 24-105, try the 24-70, the extra stop gives it even nicer bokeh. 24-70 + FF = dream. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

22-09-2010, 15:09	#8
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	I will show you at piggy's wedding, you can have a play with it all during the break Mine is soooo sharp now it can cut razor wires. But that won't help you not wanting one though..... Back on topic....keep the 24-05 a bit more, see how you can on with it, shoot different subjects too. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

22-09-2010, 21:30	#9
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	I've lusted after the 24-70 for years. I thought the 17-55 would put an end to that lust but, whilst it has to a large degree, I still sometimes wonder whether to trade up. On the plus side, it would give me the full L build quality that the current lens lacks, plus the focal length actually fits better as I have a 10-22 and 70-200. It also makes any eventual transition to FF easier. On the downside, I'd lose the IS (and a couple of hundred quid). __________________