I start photography out of curiousity with Canon T1i w/kit lens and Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens almost a year . Recently I bought another lens which is Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM . Now I
I start photography out of curiousity with Canon T1i w/kit lens and Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens almost a year . Recently I bought another lens which is Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM . Now I
When are you getting a FF camera? If your answer is anything other than "very soon," I'd really recommend considering the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Optically, it's as good or better than the 24-70mm and 24-105mm (on a crop body), it combines two excellent but mutually exclusive features of the two L lenses - f/2.8 and IS, and the 17-55mm gives you a wide angle portion of the zoom range (24mm on 1.6x is normal, not wide, which is <35mm FF-equivalent). IMO, the 17-55mm is the best general purpose zoom for a crop body, and would pair wonderfully with the excellent 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, giving you f/2.8 IS coverage from 17-200mm (and you won't miss the 15mm gap).
Hi Larry,
I have to agree with Neuro. If you aren
I agree with the above also. You can
Words get in the way of what I meant to say.
Personally, I
Nuero
Please forgive me but I
Canon EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF 24-105L, EF 50 f1.2L, EF 70-300L, 430EX.
"Criticism is something you can easily avoid, by saying nothing, doing nothing and being nothing." - Tara Moss
I'd vote for the 17-55mm f/2.8 also if you don't have intentions of upgrading to FF soon as well (1 year at the most or less). But if I am sure I will upgrade in the future and don't want to lose anything when I do upgrade then it comes down to personal preferance of wider aperture VS IS and focal length. Personaly I use aperture more than IS in that focal length range (since past 70mm is IS anyway) so Iwould choose the 24-70mm. On a FFit'ssharper in the corners at wider apertures (f/4-5.6) than the 24-105mm. But at typical landscape apertures there's not much differance at 24mm and is more or less the same for the rest of the focal length range. 1.6 crops away the corners so it would be a tighter race which would be sharper.
But like Daniel saidI use primes mostlyin that focal length range anyway[]
Hope this helps,
John.
Originally Posted by Raid
Nope, you're both wrong (although neuro is more right).
17-55 and 70-200 leaves a 15mm gap in focal length.
.
17-55 in '35mm equivalent framing' is 27-88.
70-200 in '35mm equivalent framing' is 112-320.
so there's a '35mm equivalent framing' gap of 24mm.
.
only if it were a 55mm on FF body and 70mm on APS-C body, there'd be a '35mm equivalent framing' gap of 57mm.
(using the 17-55 on an APS-C body and 70-200 on FF, you'd have a '35mm equivalent framing' overlap of 18mm.
.
but point is, you won't miss the gap between them, using them on the same body, whether you call it 15 or 24mm.
.
Now there's a test, has anyone tried doing it? take an 85mm shot with a 15-85 lens, and a 55mm shot with the 17-55mm lens, crop it and scale it to same framing as the 85mm, which one is better?
An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
Gear Photos
Dr Croubie
The 17-55 is an EF-S lens and won
Canon EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF 24-105L, EF 50 f1.2L, EF 70-300L, 430EX.
"Criticism is something you can easily avoid, by saying nothing, doing nothing and being nothing." - Tara Moss
well yeah, but i meant any other lens at 55mm on a ff body, doesn
An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
Gear Photos
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote