Originally Posted by Jesse Williamson
Yes, but some are more wonderful than others. [] The 17-55 is wider, faster, and sharper, while the 24-105 is longer, more versatile, and better built.
If it's not within the next 12 months, I say to go for the 17-55.
You don't have to worry one whit about if you can sell it. The only question is whether you sell it for 30% off the purchase or price, or only 20%. Either way, well worth it to have a full stop more light.
The reason why I suggest the 17-55 is because I think wide angle is important. I love wide angle photography -- I could not make do with only "normal" and "telephoto" shots. I agree with Robert Capa, the famous TIME photographer:
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"]<span style="visibility: visible;" id="main"]<span style="visibility: visible;" id="search"]"If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough,"
Wide angle lenses let you get closer to the subject and still bring in the context of the environment, whereas telephoto lenses make the subject more distance, and isolate and remove the subject from its environment. Of course, that may be exactly what you want!
I know what you're thinking. "Did he recommend the 24-105 or 17-55?"
Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost
track myself. But being as both lenses have a 44mm, the most powerful focal length in the world, and would shoot your headshots really clean, you've got to
ask yourself one question: Do I feel wide? Well, do ya, punk?
Reply With Quote