Next Lens....

[MikeG2012]

Hey everyone,


So I'm looking at picking up a new lens for my 7D. I currently own the discontinued 24-85 f/3.5-4.5, the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS, and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS. I'm looking to pick up a better wide angle lens, since I'm constantly comparing quality of the 24-85 images to the 70-200 and 100-400 and always coming out disappointed.


Recently I've taken up a lot of model and portrait shoots, as well as indoor event photography, some of those events without the availability of flash. So I feel the slow aperture, and poor IQ of the 24-85 is really holding me back. I've heard great things about the 17-55 f/2.8 IS, and I've also considered the 24-70 f/2.8. I know the 24-70 is heavier, more expensive and lacks IS, but it has the better build quality and weather sealing. I do some nature photography along with the indoor stuff, which is why I need a good wide angle lens that will offer the IQ I want, while still helping me to work well in just about any shooting environment.


So my question is if the 17-55 the best choice and compromise? Or should I go with the 24-70 so I'm safe to shoot anywhere and just bump up my ISO a stop or 2 to get the required shots?





Thanks,


Mike

[Daniel Browning]

On the 7D, the 24-70 isn

[Trowski]

The 17-55mm is definitely a winner in terms of image quality, matching that of L lenses, but has build quality similar to the 24-85mm you have. The 24-70mm is what I use on the 7D for indoor sports (usually with flash, since even f/2.8 doesn't cut it sometimes for sports). I bought the 24-70mm and sold my 17-55mm for three reasons: 1) I bought a 5DII, so I wanted a lens that could be used on both; 2) The extra 15mm on the long end helps a lot with indoor sports; and 3) the weather sealing to avoid dust and those times when I end up shooting in less than optimal conditions. For event photography, I'm guessing the 17-55mm's IS wouldn't help you much. However for those times when you are photographing a stationary subject, the IS on the 17-55mm makes it incredibly hand-holdable. I used to take sharp photos with that lens with shutter speeds as slow as 1/4 sec.


Seeing as you've been using a 24-85mm lens already, have you felt that it wasn't wide enough for what you wanted to shoot? As Daniel said, the 24-70mm isn't very wide on the 7D, so take that into consideration as well.


I had issues with dust getting in my 17-55mm, so much so that I actually figured out how to take the front element off and blow the dust out. I've never had any dust issues with any of my weather-sealed L lenses, and I shoot often with them outdoors. That being said, the dust never really negatively affected any of my photos, I'm just too OCD about my equipment I guess...

[neuroanatomist]

Hi Mike,


I'd recommend the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens. As Daniel says, 24mm isn't that wide on a 7D. You'd notice the difference between your current 28mm and the 24mm of the 24-70, but there's a big difference in angle of view between 24mm and 17mm on a crop body - 24mm on 1.6x is equivalent to ~38mm on FF, which pushes into the 'normal' field of view, i.e. not wide angle. If you're looking for,"...a good wide angle lens that will offer the IQ I want, while still helping me to work well in just about any shooting environment," as long as that environment doesn't include rain the 17-55mm is the way to go, IMO. The IS system will enable you to get away without a tripod for some shots (at least, you'll be able to increase your DoF by decreasing the aperture ~3 stops while still handholding for landscapes).


Fundamentally, it comes down to what focal length you want/need. If you want to get significantly wider than your current lens, a 24-xx is not going to do that for you. Question on your current 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 lens - that's a discontinued lens, so certainly it didn't come with your 7D! Did you have it from days you shot with a film SLR? I ask because the 17-55mm will give almost exactly the focal range of a 28-85mm on FF (the 17-55mm is 27-88mm FF-equivalent angle of view).


Unlike Trowski, I've not had any dust issues with the 17-55mm. One reason may be that I keep a B+W MRC UV filter on it at all times (as I do on all my lenses - even most 'weather-sealed' L lenses require a filter to complete the seal).

So my question is if the 17-55 the best choice and compromise? Or should I go with the 24-70 so I'm safe to shoot anywhere and just bump up my ISO a stop or 2 to get the required shots?

Personally, I think the 17-55mm is the best general purpose zoom for a crop body. The EF-S 15-85mm also has good IQ but the slow aperture is limiting (even more so than your 28-85mm). I'm not a fan of bumping the ISO on my 7D, because I don't think it does that well for noise above ISO 800 (though that's a personal preference, obviously). If you want a crop body wide angle zoom that has weather sealing, your only options are the 17-40mm f/4L or the 16-35mm f/2.8L - both have good IQ (although the 17-55mm is better), but one is f/4 and both are short on the long end (56mm/64mm FF-equivalent), so you lose the short tele end of the zoom range, making them less useful as general purpose zooms.


When I recently added a 5DII to my kit, I knew that would be the go-to body for landscapes and portraits, and the 7D would primarily see use as a nature/bird camera paired with the 100-400mm. Still, even though I replaced my 10-22mm (1.6x UWA zoom) with a 16-35mm (FF UWA zoom) for the ultrawide end, I have kept my 17-55mm for times when I go out with the 7D. I'll hang onto the 17-55mm as long as I have a 1.6x body!


Good luck with your decision...


--John

[Chris White]

Hi Mike,


Add another vote for the EF-S 17-55mm.


I have both the 17-55 and the 24-70 and on my 50D, I am much happier with the 17-55 results. I have never had any dust issues, but like John, the first thing I do when I get an new lens is install a B&W UV filter. Even with AF Microadjust, I was never as happy with the results on my 50D with the 24-70. In addition, on the 1.6 crop format, I do not find the 24mm to be wide enough more often than I miss the extra length at 70mm.


Now, on my 5D II, the 24-70 is unbelievable. If you were asking for a full frame recommendation, I would enthusiastically recommend the 24-70. ( I realize the 17-55 is not an option on anything except a 1.6 crop body. )


If you get a 17-55 and a good UV filter for your 7D, I think you will be a very happy camper. Like John, as long as I have a 1.6 crop body in my kit, I will have a EF-S 17-55 as well. They make a great pair.


Chris

[MikeG2012]

Thanks for the quick responses!


Occasionally I have issues with my 24-85 not being wide enough. Usually its when I

[Sean Setters]

Even with a UV filter, it

[MattG]

I agree with Sean 110% - I could imagine not ahving the 17-55!


MattG

[bob williams]

Mike, with any lens decision, there will probably some level of compromise, especially if you need a single lens for multiple shooting situations. With that said, there is another option, but of course it too requires compromise. That is the 16-35L 2.8. It is a more expensive, not great for portraits and doesn

[clemmb]

Go with a 17-55 and also a 50 f1.4