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

Mondo · 13-03-2011, 22:53

Because you know it's the cream of the crop for that focal range and in your mind, somewhere, it is better than the 17-55.

May be you can rent one for a week to see? Then you can decide if it's worth the change.

Toby · 14-03-2011, 10:30

Yeah I've thought about renting one to try but it's about 60 quid just to rent

Do you reckon I'd miss the IS?

Mondo · 14-03-2011, 14:00

I have no idea, none of my lenses has IS.

Mark · 14-03-2011, 20:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vertigo1

Do you reckon I'd miss the IS?

Turn it off for a while and see how you get on?

If you rarely shoot slower than the 1/focal length 'rule', you'll probably be OK without (or at least suffer only a minimal number of 'duds').

PS - Both my 'main' lenses have IS and both have it switched on.

Toby · 17-03-2011, 17:35

Oh bloody hell, it's now dropped to £916 on Amazon - they're deliberately trying to tempt me.

Should I...........?

Mondo · 17-03-2011, 19:09

I paid £875 for mine from Kerso. Or less, not over £900.

Toby · 17-03-2011, 19:23

Yeah I got my 70-200 from Ian.

Not sure what his current prices are like but, if it's around what you paid, I'd rather pay the relatively little extra for a "proper" UK model tbh.

Mondo · 17-03-2011, 19:25

I don't think there are proper UK model for lenses. The only difference in camera is the battery charger.

Toby · 17-03-2011, 20:43

Yeah I suppose - just the technical difference twixt a UK model and "grey" import but don't think it makes that much difference.

Moot point anyway as his latest price on the 24-70 is £899 + £10 delivery which is all of £7 less than Amazon.

I've decided that, if I can get £600 for the 17-55 then I'm going to make the switch

I may regret it but you have to give these things a try

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 __________________

13-03-2011, 22:53	#2
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	Because you know it's the cream of the crop for that focal range and in your mind, somewhere, it is better than the 17-55. May be you can rent one for a week to see? Then you can decide if it's worth the change. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

14-03-2011, 10:30	#3
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	Yeah I've thought about renting one to try but it's about 60 quid just to rent Do you reckon I'd miss the IS? __________________

14-03-2011, 14:00	#4
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	I have no idea, none of my lenses has IS. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

17-03-2011, 17:35	#6
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	Oh bloody hell, it's now dropped to £916 on Amazon - they're deliberately trying to tempt me. Should I...........? __________________

17-03-2011, 19:09	#7
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	I paid £875 for mine from Kerso. Or less, not over £900. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

17-03-2011, 19:23	#8
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	Yeah I got my 70-200 from Ian. Not sure what his current prices are like but, if it's around what you paid, I'd rather pay the relatively little extra for a "proper" UK model tbh. __________________

17-03-2011, 19:25	#9
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	I don't think there are proper UK model for lenses. The only difference in camera is the battery charger. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

17-03-2011, 20:43	#10
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	Yeah I suppose - just the technical difference twixt a UK model and "grey" import but don't think it makes that much difference. Moot point anyway as his latest price on the 24-70 is £899 + £10 delivery which is all of £7 less than Amazon. I've decided that, if I can get £600 for the 17-55 then I'm going to make the switch I may regret it but you have to give these things a try __________________