I recently stepped up to a fullframe kit, and have been trying out the 24-105 that came in the kit.
I didn't, however, have the extra cash to step up to a full-frame short 2.8 zoom ($2300!!). I previously used a 7D and 17-55 for this.
Question to the great pool of talent here... should I keep my 17-55 for a short 2.8 zoom, or take a hit on low light and use the 24-105?
Seems like the OOF area and IQ differences will sortof balance out (the FF can go a stop faster, same rough IQ, with the same light, but the lens is a stop slower)
However, I'm thinking about keeping the 7D and 17-55 so that I can get better hit on focus in low light (2.8 focus points versus f/4).
Thoughts?
I didn't, however, have the extra cash to step up to a full-frame short 2.8 zoom ($2300!!). I previously used a 7D and 17-55 for this.
Question to the great pool of talent here... should I keep my 17-55 for a short 2.8 zoom, or take a hit on low light and use the 24-105?
Seems like the OOF area and IQ differences will sortof balance out (the FF can go a stop faster, same rough IQ, with the same light, but the lens is a stop slower)
However, I'm thinking about keeping the 7D and 17-55 so that I can get better hit on focus in low light (2.8 focus points versus f/4).
Thoughts?