Quote Originally Posted by wimpy
I guess rather than stretching to afford the
24-105 i might be better off with a mid range macro and telephoto, each
being roughly half the 24-105's price, and covering a larger combined
focal length.

Yes, IMHO. Particularly since the quality/ease of use will be better than a 24-105 with tubes.


Quote Originally Posted by clemmb
Daniel Browningsaid "the 17-55
has far superior image quality " I disagree. Check Brayan's ISO
12233 Chart 100% Crop Comparison. The 24-105 is much sharper than the
17-55.

Different bodies
cannot be compared, just as it says in the instructions:


Quote Originally Posted by [url="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Help/ISO-12233.aspx
About ISO 12233 Chart Data and Sample Images[/url]]
Lenses should be compared to each other only with test data from the same camera body.

That's from this page: About ISO 12233 Chart Data and Sample Images


There are too many differences between bodies: entirely
different spatial frequencies, the framing is different, and even the chart itself may be different.