Need daily lens suggestion

[farmdwg]

About to pull the trigger on a 7d body as I need the speed for football and baseball games. I have access to a 70-200 2.8 IS for this which is great, but I need some suggestions on what I should get for my daily lens. I will be doing the occasional video as well.

Here are some that I am considering.

Canon 24-105 f/4L IS

Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8

Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 DI VC

Canon 24-70 f/4L IS

I'm seriously all over the place here. The f/2.8 is very attractive for low light situations, but should I just get a 50mm prime for those situations? Not sure.

Thanks!

 

[Loswr]

EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. The 24-xx zooms are great on FF, but on APS-C they don't give you a wide angle. IMO, the 17-55mm is the best general purpose zoom for APS-C.

 

[Stig]

EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. The 24-xx zooms are great on FF, but on APS-C they don't give you a wide angle. IMO, the 17-55mm is the best general purpose zoom for APS-C.

+1

not an unusual dilemma, been there myself, went with 17-55, didn't regret it (until I went FF and wished I already had the 24-105 that is)... long story short, it is f/2.8, it has IS, and it is quite wide on crop...

only thing that might throw you off is the need for weather sealing, or, if you know you wont need wide, but would like more reach (but I guess that's where the 70-200 would come in)

btw, just to mess up with your decision making a bit and maybe plant a bug in your head ... I was also considering the 15-85 IS... not fast aperture wise, but I hear quite good IQ, nice range, IS, cheaper than 17-55...

 

[farmdwg]

Thank you for the input.

I've been mulling over the Crop vs FF issue as well, but I think I need the higher FPS that a crop gives me due to baseball and football. With that said, does that change the thought behind the approach to which glass I go with?

 

[AlanF]

The 15-85 is very sharp and gives extra range either side of the 17-55. It's one of the best and most useful APS-C lenses made.

 

[cellomaster27]

The canon 17-55mm efs is nice but also consider the sigma 24-70mm 2.8. Just have to hope on a good sharp copy. The canon one is really expensive.

+1 to the canon 15-85mm suggestions. 15 is way wider than 17.

If you're planning on upgrading in he future, ie full frame, then start buying EF mount lenses. Primes are very nice but honestly, zooms are more comfortable and more versatile for everyday outings.

 

[Stig]

Thank you for the input.

I've been mulling over the Crop vs FF issue as well, but I think I need the higher FPS that a crop gives me due to baseball and football. With that said, does that change the thought behind the approach to which glass I go with?

well, my train of thought after reading the above would be: 1. you will be doing sports photography, but for that you will have the 70-200, so the lens you are looking for now will be just general "walk around" lens and the sports photography requirements don't influence the choice much, but 2. it means you decided you will go with crop for some time and that would make me lean towards good EF-S lens (the 17-55 if you want the best EF-S zoom, or maybe 15-85 for a bit more reach on both ends)

btw, you also mentioned shooting video... I don't, but I guess IS is helpful in many video situations... and I realize that every one of the lenses discussed here has it, I just thought ill mention it in case you would bring in another alternative later

aaand one more thing...

should I just get a 50mm prime for those situations?

yes, do it additional to the zoom... if "just" the f/1.8, for the price, its great, it was maybe my best photo gear "investment" when I bought it having only slow kit zoom (the lens explained the concept of DOF to me e.g. for portraits, gave me more low light possibilities, the experience of using a prime...)

Edit: I keep forgetting the new sigma 18-35 f/1.8 zoom, but you might want to look at that as well, limited range, no IS, but a f/1.8 zoom... ooone point eeeight!

 

[brad-man]

Thank you for the input.

I've been mulling over the Crop vs FF issue as well, but I think I need the higher FPS that a crop gives me due to baseball and football. With that said, does that change the thought behind the approach to which glass I go with?

Knowing whether you will stay with a crop sensor camera or not will absolutely affect your decisions on lens selection. The fine EF-S lenses mentioned above will not work on a FF camera, they are for APS-C only. If you are sure that you will continue to shoot with a crop body, it is not so critical. But the convenience of using your (expensive) lenses on either body should not be underestimated. If you feel that you will "upgrade" to FF any time soon, then I would suggest that the only EF-S lens you buy should be a wide zoom, like the Canon 10-22mm or the soon to be released Sigma. The EF24-105 is an awesome walk around lens on a crop, but for the fact that 36-168mm FF equivalent is not very wide.

 

[Jim O]

I have to agree with the the general consensus.

The EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS is a great walk around lens but... people say it's a dust magnet as it isn't well sealed. I haven't had issues with mine though I haven't used it as much lately. I'm mainly shooting FF. I've used it for everything from events to product shots. The wide end is not wide, though and a 10-20 Sigma or EF-S 10-22 would be a nice addition, if you need something wide.

The point that has been made is important. If you plan to keep your 7D, or are confident that you would replace it with another APS-C based camera, it's the best choice.

 

[Loswr]

Knowing whether you will stay with a crop sensor camera or not will absolutely affect your decisions on lens selection. The fine EF-S lenses mentioned above will not work on a FF camera, they are for APS-C only. If you are sure that you will continue to shoot with a crop body, it is not so critical. But the convenience of using your (expensive) lenses on either body should not be underestimated. If you feel that you will "upgrade" to FF any time soon, then I would suggest that the only EF-S lens you buy should be a wide zoom, like the Canon 10-22mm or the soon to be released Sigma. The EF24-105 is an awesome walk around lens on a crop, but for the fact that 36-168mm FF equivalent is not very wide.

Depends on what 'any time soon' means. The high end EF-S lenses hold their value well. I lost ~$50 on the 10-22mm and ~$100 on the 17-55mm, after 1 and close to 3 years of use, respectively. If 'soon' is next month, fine. If it's 'sometime in the future, I hope' then get the best lens(es) for the body you have now.

 

[barracuda]

I also recommend the 17-55, but you might want to consider the new Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 DC HSM Art lens. It has gotten a rave review from Bryan at TDP:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-18-35mm-f-1.8-DC-HSM-Lens.aspx

It's also about a couple hundred dollars cheaper!

 

[brad-man]

Knowing whether you will stay with a crop sensor camera or not will absolutely affect your decisions on lens selection. The fine EF-S lenses mentioned above will not work on a FF camera, they are for APS-C only. If you are sure that you will continue to shoot with a crop body, it is not so critical. But the convenience of using your (expensive) lenses on either body should not be underestimated. If you feel that you will "upgrade" to FF any time soon, then I would suggest that the only EF-S lens you buy should be a wide zoom, like the Canon 10-22mm or the soon to be released Sigma. The EF24-105 is an awesome walk around lens on a crop, but for the fact that 36-168mm FF equivalent is not very wide.

Depends on what 'any time soon' means. The high end EF-S lenses hold their value well. I lost ~$50 on the 10-22mm and ~$100 on the 17-55mm, after 1 and close to 3 years of use, respectively. If 'soon' is next month, fine. If it's 'sometime in the future, I hope' then get the best lens(es) for the body you have now.

Quite right. Any time soon is very relevant. Still, I see no trade offs with the OP only buying an UW zoom in APS-C format and a FF compatible standard zoom. The OP listed the Tamron 24-70VC as a possible choice. Other than the loss of 17mm at the wide end, the Tamron is, I believe, vastly superior in every way. Better build/weather sealed, better image stabilisation, less distortion, sharper, etc. As long as the OP doesn't miss those 17mm, where is the trade off?

 

[thgmuffin]

No 17-50 F2.8?

 

[SwissBear]

I also recommend the 17-55, but you might want to consider the new Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 DC HSM Art lens. It has gotten a rave review from Bryan at TDP:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-18-35mm-f-1.8-DC-HSM-Lens.aspx

It's also about a couple hundred dollars cheaper!

Also other reviewers like Lenstip are very favourable about this lens.

This Sigma lens is actually my next investment. For "general purpose" i'd couple it either with a 24-105L or the 85 f/1.8.
The 24-105 is indeed not very wide on a crop, but it's quality glass and together with a flash I really like it to to document events, with it's reach you can stay a bit more in the background.

 

[rs]

Knowing whether you will stay with a crop sensor camera or not will absolutely affect your decisions on lens selection. The fine EF-S lenses mentioned above will not work on a FF camera, they are for APS-C only. If you are sure that you will continue to shoot with a crop body, it is not so critical. But the convenience of using your (expensive) lenses on either body should not be underestimated. If you feel that you will "upgrade" to FF any time soon, then I would suggest that the only EF-S lens you buy should be a wide zoom, like the Canon 10-22mm or the soon to be released Sigma. The EF24-105 is an awesome walk around lens on a crop, but for the fact that 36-168mm FF equivalent is not very wide.

Depends on what 'any time soon' means. The high end EF-S lenses hold their value well. I lost ~$50 on the 10-22mm and ~$100 on the 17-55mm, after 1 and close to 3 years of use, respectively. If 'soon' is next month, fine. If it's 'sometime in the future, I hope' then get the best lens(es) for the body you have now.

+1

As the OP is about to order a 7D, I'd guess that any possible migration to FF is years away, if ever. EF-S, and more specifically, the 17-55 is the way to go. I used a 17-55/2.8 IS and 70-200/2.8 IS on crop for years, and while it does encourage lens swapping, I can't remember any times where I needed the 55-70 range.

 

[AmbientLight]

As the OP is about to order a 7D, I'd guess that any possible migration to FF is years away, if ever.

Hold your horses. Owning and of course using a 7D is exactly what drove me to switch to full-frame in the first place.

Based on my own experience I don't think a 7D is likely to keep people using crop cameras, instead I expect others to come to the same conclusions I came to: Having lots of pro features to play with, but being seriously hampered by the sensor's low-light performance? Purchasing both a 1D-X and a 5D Mark III in a hurry once those two cameras came out was my reaction to that. This is why I think Neuro's statement is right on the money.

 

[Zv]

Knowing whether you will stay with a crop sensor camera or not will absolutely affect your decisions on lens selection. The fine EF-S lenses mentioned above will not work on a FF camera, they are for APS-C only. If you are sure that you will continue to shoot with a crop body, it is not so critical. But the convenience of using your (expensive) lenses on either body should not be underestimated. If you feel that you will "upgrade" to FF any time soon, then I would suggest that the only EF-S lens you buy should be a wide zoom, like the Canon 10-22mm or the soon to be released Sigma. The EF24-105 is an awesome walk around lens on a crop, but for the fact that 36-168mm FF equivalent is not very wide.

Depends on what 'any time soon' means. The high end EF-S lenses hold their value well. I lost ~$50 on the 10-22mm and ~$100 on the 17-55mm, after 1 and close to 3 years of use, respectively. If 'soon' is next month, fine. If it's 'sometime in the future, I hope' then get the best lens(es) for the body you have now.

+1

As the OP is about to order a 7D, I'd guess that any possible migration to FF is years away, if ever. EF-S, and more specifically, the 17-55 is the way to go. I used a 17-55/2.8 IS and 70-200/2.8 IS on crop for years, and while it does encourage lens swapping, I can't remember any times where I needed the 55-70 range.

The 10-22 and 17-55 don't hold their value that well. I lost about $120 on the 10-22mm (mainly due to a quick sale) and the 17-55 isn't bloody selling at all. Some sellers are selling it for ¥66,000, considering it's ¥105,000 new I'd say they are losing money on it big time! I'm sorry but the 17-55 is a good lens but I'd stay away from ef-s right now. Get a used 24-105L that someone is selling off from their kit. That way you can still use it on FF and if you sell it you'll likely get most of your money back.

 

[captainkanji]

The 17-55 2.8 is the way to go. I had it when I owned the 7D, and it is fantastic. IMO it is the best EF-S lens Canon makes. I was able to sell it for almost as much as I paid for it (I bought it used). It only came off my camera when I needed the reach of the 70-700 f4 (another great lens for the 7D).

 

[Jim O]

Based on my own experience I don't think a 7D is likely to keep people using crop cameras, instead I expect others to come to the same conclusions I came to: Having lots of pro features to play with, but being seriously hampered by the sensor's low-light performance? Purchasing both a 1D-X and a 5D Mark III in a hurry once those two cameras came out was my reaction to that...

I'm not sure that most people who don't make a lot of money with their cameras or who don't have $10K burning a hole in their pockets go down that road.

Current Adorama prices:

7D:
New - $1499
Canon Refurb 7D - $999 (special now - they're $1199 at Canon)
Used (E) - $869

5D3:
New - $3499
Canon refurb - N/A (available at Canon store for $2,799.21)
Used (E) - $2989

1D X:
New - $6799
Canon refurb - N/A ($5493.20 at Canon store when available)
Used (E+) - $6249

You're talking about replacing a $1500 camera (one that you can get for $999 as a Canon refurb!) with $10,000 worth of cameras. Of course if you're going to buy those two bodies you'll also *need* a $2300 24-70 II which you might not get with the 7D. You might have the EF-S 17-55 2.8 and have no use for it.

I think a lot of 7D owners will wait for the 7D2, plunk down $2K or so for it and be happy staying with a crop sensor, depending of course on what Canon actually produces in the 7D2.

 

[brad-man]

Knowing whether you will stay with a crop sensor camera or not will absolutely affect your decisions on lens selection. The fine EF-S lenses mentioned above will not work on a FF camera, they are for APS-C only. If you are sure that you will continue to shoot with a crop body, it is not so critical. But the convenience of using your (expensive) lenses on either body should not be underestimated. If you feel that you will "upgrade" to FF any time soon, then I would suggest that the only EF-S lens you buy should be a wide zoom, like the Canon 10-22mm or the soon to be released Sigma. The EF24-105 is an awesome walk around lens on a crop, but for the fact that 36-168mm FF equivalent is not very wide.

Depends on what 'any time soon' means. The high end EF-S lenses hold their value well. I lost ~$50 on the 10-22mm and ~$100 on the 17-55mm, after 1 and close to 3 years of use, respectively. If 'soon' is next month, fine. If it's 'sometime in the future, I hope' then get the best lens(es) for the body you have now.

+1

As the OP is about to order a 7D, I'd guess that any possible migration to FF is years away, if ever. EF-S, and more specifically, the 17-55 is the way to go. I used a 17-55/2.8 IS and 70-200/2.8 IS on crop for years, and while it does encourage lens swapping, I can't remember any times where I needed the 55-70 range.

The 10-22 and 17-55 don't hold their value that well. I lost about $120 on the 10-22mm (mainly due to a quick sale) and the 17-55 isn't bloody selling at all. Some sellers are selling it for ¥66,000, considering it's ¥105,000 new I'd say they are losing money on it big time! I'm sorry but the 17-55 is a good lens but I'd stay away from ef-s right now. Get a used 24-105L that someone is selling off from their kit. That way you can still use it on FF and if you sell it you'll likely get most of your money back.

This makes more sense to me. The 24-105 is selling for a very reasonable price and I used it for years (it was my first L lens) on my 550D with great results. My second L lens was the 17-40. That combo served me well for a quite a few years and I still have both. If the OP were to purchase the Tamron (like I ended up doing), the only possible "upgrade" to that lens would be (arguably) the EF240-70 mkll. I don't even see that as an upgrade, since I highly value the stabilisation of the Tammy. In either event, the OP wouldn't need to upgrade if he later purchased a 6D, 5Dlll or whatever and could use them on both cameras.