If you could Have only One

[neuroanatomist]

If you could only have one lens on your canon camera

...you'd have a Canon point-and-shoot! We use dSLRs so we can change lenses...


But, to answer your question, for a 1.6x crop body it would be the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. On a FF body it would be the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L.



<div>

the 800mm f/5.6L.

<div>Brendan, you'd have a camera on your lens, not the other way around, with that 18"/10-pound monster. Besides, aren't you always telling us to "get closer"? [:P]With a 20' MFD, you might need a bigger back yard!</div>
</div>

[Sean Setters]

But, to answer your question, for a 1.6x crop body it would be the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. On a FF body it would be the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L.

I think I'd have to agree with your selections, neuro.

[sirhc_1]

If I will have one lens that would be a LEICA NOCTILUX-M 50 mm f/0.95 ASPH or a Carl Zeiss 50mm f/0.7 converted for use with Canon EOS body ( if conversion is possible )[]





In the Canon lens line up, it will definitely be an EF 200mm f/1.8 L!

[Gian Luca]

sirhc_1 you cannot adapt the leica noctilux-M but you can adapt the Leica R f0.95, and yes you can adapt the Zeiss lens, however I am sure that this is not your choice if you could have only one lens. For me 24-105L f4 IS

[Colin]

But, to answer your question, for a 1.6x crop body it would be the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. On a FF body it would be the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L.

I think I'd have to agree with your selections, neuro.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

I think so too... the 24-105 beats out the 24-70 in terms of IS and reach, and I think it has better control of CA outside of the focal plane, and I really like the 24-105, and don't want to give it up if I can keep it, but... the 24-70, even if it is a clunky bastard with less zoom range, just makes me happy in ways the 24-105 doesn't (as much). To be honest, I wouldn't bitch about having either.

[cxr]

24-105 f4 IS USM

[2slo]

I'm curious to your compelling reasons for preferring a 17-55 over the24-70mm on a crop body?

[Jon Ruyle]

I can think of three obvious ones: IS, better image quality (I guess- I never tested them), and wider angle.

[Sheiky]

I'm curious to your compelling reasons for preferring a 17-55 over the24-70mm on a crop body?

24mm on a crop isn't really wide and 70 isn't really long either, so your lens isn't as versatile as it would be on a fullframe camera. The 55-70mm difference isn't a big factor because when you need the 70mm field of view, often 1 step forward is enough. The 17-24mm difference though is HUGE! [:P]


And yes of course the other reasons mentioned above []


My vote is for the 17-55 on crop and 24-105 on full frame.


Jan

[Brendan7]

Besides, aren't you always telling us to "get closer"? [img]/emoticons/emotion-4.gif[/img]With a 20' MFD, you might need a bigger back yard!

Yes I am, because getting closer doesn't cost $12,000!