Undecided . . .

[jolarjos]

I start photography out of curiousity with Canon T1i w/kit lens and Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens almost a year . Recently I bought another lens which is Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM . Now I

[neuroanatomist]

When are you getting a FF camera? If your answer is anything other than "very soon," I'd really recommend considering the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Optically, it's as good or better than the 24-70mm and 24-105mm (on a crop body), it combines two excellent but mutually exclusive features of the two L lenses - f/2.8 and IS, and the 17-55mm gives you a wide angle portion of the zoom range (24mm on 1.6x is normal, not wide, which is <35mm FF-equivalent). IMO, the 17-55mm is the best general purpose zoom for a crop body, and would pair wonderfully with the excellent 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, giving you f/2.8 IS coverage from 17-200mm (and you won't miss the 15mm gap).

[Kayaker72]

Hi Larry,


I have to agree with Neuro. If you aren

[andnowimbroke]

I agree with the above also. You can

[Daniel Browning]

Personally, I

[Raid]

Nuero


Please forgive me but I

[Fast Glass]

I'd vote for the 17-55mm f/2.8 also if you don't have intentions of upgrading to FF soon as well (1 year at the most or less). But if I am sure I will upgrade in the future and don't want to lose anything when I do upgrade then it comes down to personal preferance of wider aperture VS IS and focal length. Personaly I use aperture more than IS in that focal length range (since past 70mm is IS anyway) so Iwould choose the 24-70mm. On a FFit'ssharper in the corners at wider apertures (f/4-5.6) than the 24-105mm. But at typical landscape apertures there's not much differance at 24mm and is more or less the same for the rest of the focal length range. 1.6 crops away the corners so it would be a tighter race which would be sharper.


But like Daniel saidI use primes mostlyin that focal length range anyway[]


Hope this helps,


John.