17-55 ef-s + 24-105, or 24-70 2.8?

[neuroanatomist]

I am toying with the idea of the 24-70 2.8 or perhaps going to primes - w/ the low light performance of the 5dIII it is an interesting question.

I find f/2.8 is often sufficient in 'low' light. I reach for a fast prime when I want thinner DoF.

[Busted Knuckles]

I find f/2.8 is often sufficient in 'low' light. I reach for a fast prime when I want thinner DoF.

Right tool for the right task - struggled w/ the post as the options are pretty expansive... and expensive. Canon has done a good job of providing options, layer in 3rd Party options and it gets confusing.

I had pre-ordered the 24-70 2.8 II and got tired of waiting & picked up the 24-105. Given the quality of the 2.8 I think I should have waited, maybe, sort of. I have the middle covered w/ the nifty fifty for speed, so the 24 end is missing the speed - yet $1750 seems a lot for that segment. Seems that for the step up in $$$ flexibility of the 24-70 and loss of 2 stops & IS might, again might be the right thing.

If I hadn't been just six lousy numbers off from the lottery this wouldn't be an issue