Quote Originally Posted by Pamela


I hand hold my camera a lot to catch children in action/sports~I guess that's why the IS lens appealed to me, along with having APS-C sensor. I was also looking at the 24-70mm f2.8L, and wondering if it wouldn't be a better place to start?

Hi Pamela,


I went through many of the same thoughts recently, and there are literally hundreds of posts across multiple forums debating the 17-55 f2.8 IS vs. the 24-70 f2.8L. I decided on the 17-55.


Do keep in mind what IS will and won't do - it will help for hand-holding in low-light situations, but it won't help stop action so if your goal is to freeze a running child in your picture you need a fast shutter speed, and that eliminates the effect of camera shake (meaning no need for IS).


Having said that, there are quiet moments indoors where you'll want to take a shot in natural light - the IS will be a big help there.


The other issue that's relevant is the wider end of the focal length - 24-70 mm on your APS-C sensor equates to 38-112 mm for full frame. 38 mm does not have a very wide field of view and may be tough to use for group shots or in small rooms. Compare that to the 17 mm wide end of the 17-55, which equates to 27 mm, a bona fide wide angle lens. I suspect if you decide on the 24-70, you'll find yourself wanting the 10-22 to fill in the wide end. Conversely, if you go with the 16-35 and sell the 28-135, you'll find there's too big a gap between 35 and 70 mm. You likely will not notice the gap between 55 and 70 mm.


The 'classic' combination of a 24-70 and a 16-35 on a full frame sensor is equivalent to the 17-55 plus the 10-22 on an APS-C body. One point on the overlap there - 10 mm doesn't sound much different than 17 mm, but a look through both lenses at their widest will convince you that there is a significant difference between the angles of view.


I think, with an APS-C body you'll be much better off with the 17-55, and since you stated you intend to keep that camera as a backup down the road, you'll have a continued use for the lens.


(Side note: For portraits, I absolutely concur with Samuel's recommendation of the 85mm f1.8 lens - on a crop body the 136mm equivalent length is ideal for close-up shots. That lens would also come in handy for your son's gigs - you'll pull in a lot more light with that lens than your current zoom lenses (the 70-300 will be at f4 at 85 mm, and the 28-135 will be at f5 at 85 mm) - no doubt you've seen that your 50mm f1.8 performs well in low-light - the 85mm 1.8 adds some focal length along with much faster autofocus and a much smoother background blur.)