Questions on EF 24-70mm II on 5D Mk3 vs EF-S 17-55mm on 7D

[Loswr]

I think FF won the war.

It wins the war if you can afford it (or if like the US Government, you're willing to run up a deficit for a war you can't afford). The only real advantage of APS-C is lower cost...but that can be a significant advantage.

 

[takesome1]

The only real advantage of APS-C is lower cost...

If you can't start a debate war with that statement, all of the fighting must be over.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

I wish someone would come out and be the devil's advocate, and there would be an interesting FF vs APS-C war. Unfortunately, everyone is (accurately) toe-ing the line that there's no competition between the combinations.

Even to be a "devils advocate" there should be some merit in the case (and case was about the quality of 7D+17-55 vs 5D III + 24-70 L II) ... we cannot be idiotic just for the sake of argument to support something we know isn't a fact ... so the question of "toe-ing the line" does not even arise.

 

[gbchriste]

I've never owned the 17-55 but am a fairly recent owner of the 5D3/24-70MII combo. All I can say is "Holy crap this is a great combination!!!!"

 

[David_in_Seattle]

Hello experts,

I currently shoot dual cameras with both 5D MkIII and 7D and the following zooms that I usually carry around during my sessions:
- EF 16-35mmII
- EF 70-200mm IS II
- EF-S 17-55mm
- EF 35mm 1.4

I currently do not have 24-70mmII. However, I have just pulled the trigger on purchasing the EF 24-70mmII and now contemplating if I am making a wrong move here.

Does anybody know if EF24-70mm on the 5DIII would be better than the EF-S 17-55mm on the 7D? I usually deal with family related photos such as portraits, birthdays, cake smashing events etc. Most of the time, I have good lighting except for several indoor events which off camera flash will take care off.

Should I be returning the EF24-70mmII and just stick with all the lenses that I already have and normally work with? Is there an advantage of using the EF24-70mmII on the 5DIII over the EF-S 17-55mm on the 7D?

Thanks in advance!

I have both lenses (17-55 f2.8 IS and 24-70 f2.8 v2). Based on the info you provided here's my advice:

1) Why would you use the 24-70 v2 on the 7D when you already have a 5dmk3? The 24-70's distinct advantages will be more apparent on a FF body because f2.8 on a cropped body is about the equivalent of f4 on a FF so you won't see a benefit in terms of depth of field and bokeh.

2) If you're not using the 17-55 for video then I recommend selling it. The 24-70 v2 is optically superior in just about every noticeable way. Even though it's not an IS lens, the 5Dmk3's ISO is at least 2 stops better than the 7D so you can always crank up the ISO and still have a better image than the 17-55.

Just my two cents,

 

[Vigood]

I have both lenses (17-55 f2.8 IS and 24-70 f2.8 v2). Based on the info you provided here's my advice:

1) Why would you use the 24-70 v2 on the 7D when you already have a 5dmk3? The 24-70's distinct advantages will be more apparent on a FF body because f2.8 on a cropped body is about the equivalent of f4 on a FF so you won't see a benefit in terms of depth of field and bokeh.

2) If you're not using the 17-55 for video then I recommend selling it. The 24-70 v2 is optically superior in just about every noticeable way. Even though it's not an IS lens, the 5Dmk3's ISO is at least 2 stops better than the 7D so you can always crank up the ISO and still have a better image than the 17-55.

Just my two cents,

1. I will not be using the 24-70mm on the 7D. The comparison is between 24-70mm/5DIII or 17-55mm/7D. I was contemplating if I should keep the 24-70mm to use with 5DIII or perhaps I can get the same kind of result with 17-55mm/7D.

2. That is indeed the consensus which is to sell the 17-55mm. I have put it up for sale since I do not really do video.

Thanks again for all of the helps!

 

[Pi]

In addition to everything said, the 5D cameras have better colors than the 7D (different CFA filters), and take visibly cleaner images even at base ISO.

 

[sagittariansrock]

I wish someone would come out and be the devil's advocate, and there would be an interesting FF vs APS-C war. Unfortunately, everyone is (accurately) toe-ing the line that there's no competition between the combinations.

Even to be a "devils advocate" there should be some merit in the case (and case was about the quality of 7D+17-55 vs 5D III + 24-70 L II) ... we cannot be idiotic just for the sake of argument to support something we know isn't a fact ... so the question of "toe-ing the line" does not even arise.

Clearly, irony is lost on you...

 

[Rienzphotoz]

I wish someone would come out and be the devil's advocate, and there would be an interesting FF vs APS-C war. Unfortunately, everyone is (accurately) toe-ing the line that there's no competition between the combinations.

Even to be a "devils advocate" there should be some merit in the case (and case was about the quality of 7D+17-55 vs 5D III + 24-70 L II) ... we cannot be idiotic just for the sake of argument to support something we know isn't a fact ... so the question of "toe-ing the line" does not even arise.

Clearly, irony is lost on you...

Clearly speculation is your forte...

 

[RLPhoto]

It's not even comparable. The images from the FF combo will make the 7D combo look like its broken.

 

[sagittariansrock]

I wish someone would come out and be the devil's advocate, and there would be an interesting FF vs APS-C war. Unfortunately, everyone is (accurately) toe-ing the line that there's no competition between the combinations.

Even to be a "devils advocate" there should be some merit in the case (and case was about the quality of 7D+17-55 vs 5D III + 24-70 L II) ... we cannot be idiotic just for the sake of argument to support something we know isn't a fact ... so the question of "toe-ing the line" does not even arise.

Clearly, irony is lost on you...

Clearly speculation is your forte...

What did I speculate?
Hundreds of posts on these forums have been consumed by idiotic discussions of FF vs APS-C initiated by people posting just for the sake of argument. I pointed out that everyone in this case was being accurate in pointing out there is no competition between the 5DIII/24-70 vs 7D/17-55, which is a rare sight. The fact that this is also my own view, is clearly reflected in the second paragraph of my original comment, which you neglected to quote.
I was being ironic in stating I wish there was someone going against the tide and providing some forum-fight. Now, where is the speculation?
I believe you completely misunderstood my post and missed the irony, and compounded that error by making this last meaningless comment.
I don't like unnecessary unpleasantness on anonymous forums, so I'd stop here. But please refrain from commenting if you don't understand what is being said.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Full frame? Full frame of what? What is medium or large format then? Do folks mean the 135/leica/minature format?

I've looked into my crystal ball, and yep, the spirits are telling me that a much more expensive much more recently designed camera and lens combo will be better than the older, substantially cheaper combo.

I nearly fell off my chair.

I bet all the 5D3 + 24-70 f2.8II owners are really delighted with that revelation.

I asked the spirits about the law of diminishing returns and about kit versus ability / technique, they said 'get the light right' and 'get out with your camera more'.

There is a 7D thread on here for pics taken only with a 7D and it demonstrates perfectly what an obselete peice of embarrassing junk the 7D is. Canon actually wrote to me and asked me to file their brand logo off of the flash top.

I can only look with green eyed envy at the 5D3 users, for whom every image is a peach, to the point where I often see folk buying a 5D3 and instantly becoming wedding photographers, no tuition or anything required.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

I wish someone would come out and be the devil's advocate, and there would be an interesting FF vs APS-C war. Unfortunately, everyone is (accurately) toe-ing the line that there's no competition between the combinations.

Even to be a "devils advocate" there should be some merit in the case (and case was about the quality of 7D+17-55 vs 5D III + 24-70 L II) ... we cannot be idiotic just for the sake of argument to support something we know isn't a fact ... so the question of "toe-ing the line" does not even arise.

Clearly, irony is lost on you...

Clearly speculation is your forte...

What did I speculate?
Hundreds of posts on these forums have been consumed by idiotic discussions of FF vs APS-C initiated by people posting just for the sake of argument. I pointed out that everyone in this case was being accurate in pointing out there is no competition between the 5DIII/24-70 vs 7D/17-55, which is a rare sight. The fact that this is also my own view, is clearly reflected in the second paragraph of my original comment, which you neglected to quote.
I was being ironic in stating I wish there was someone going against the tide and providing some forum-fight. Now, where is the speculation?
I believe you completely misunderstood my post and missed the irony, and compounded that error by making this last meaningless comment.
I don't like unnecessary unpleasantness on anonymous forums, so I'd stop here. But please refrain from commenting if you don't understand what is being said.

I commented on your last line i.e. "Clearly, irony is lost on you" ... but you obviously didn't get it and are still speculating about why there wasn't any "forum-fight" about EF 24-70mm II on 5D Mk3 vs EF-S 17-55mm on 7D when "Hundreds of posts on these forums have been consumed by idiotic discussions of FF vs APS-C initiated by people posting just for the sake of argument" : etc etc ... so take your own advice and "please refrain from commenting if you don't understand what is being said". Meanwhile you should be happy coz your wish is granted i.e. "providing some forum-fight" Peace

 

[M.ST]

There is no doubt: Get the 24-70 2.8 II and you never regret it.

1. Most EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS lenses are really good, but non of them can reach the IQ of the 24-70 2.8 II. At f/2.8 and over f/11 the 24-70 2.8 II totally outperforms the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS.

2. Don´t compare old APS-C cameras with new FF cameras

 

[hwoarang5]

im lazy to read any other personal rant or insults.. just wanna share, i have both the set up(almost) mention above..

im a wedding photographers and i started with a crop set up, efs 17-55 F2.8 + 550d + 85mm f1.8 , then move on to upgrade a 5d mkiii + ef 24-70mm f2.8, even tested the tamron 24-70mm f2.8 vc head to head review before selling it...

and im using them on different purposes, 24-70MMii + mark III has the best of canon has to offer for wide aperture zoom that has amazing image quality and sharpness.... best investment i made... but it get sucky when u shoot video or shooting close distant subject .eg... a ring or wedding details at close to its MFD... (now im using an electronic extension hood + manual focus, more reliable)

while efs 17-55mm f2.8 has one of the best IS enable zoom for video and close distance shot....

fyi though canon stock firmware is ****** up, i use magic lantern on my crop body for extra features depends on..

but in the end i sold off my efs 17-55, and got myself a 135mm F2... and planning to get a 10-22mm for video use on the crop...


ps: tamron 24-70mm f2.8 vc actually has best of both world, sharp image, and IS for video, not to mention sharp close distance shooting.. but its suck at QC , i change 3 units to finally get one that has no QC issue.. decide to sell it off ,

 

[alexturton]

f2.8 is f2.8 irrespective of FF vs crop.

However, 5d3 will preserve higher a higher bit-rate and preserve more detail in shots ALWAYS than a 7d, particularly at higher ISOs so 24-70 +5d3 will always be better than 7d + 17-55. The only exeception is if and when you need IS (like video) when the IS of the 17-55 would be better. I personally have never found the colour rendition on the 17-55 to be great where as the 24-70 ii is fantastic.

 

[Loswr]

f2.8 is f2.8 irrespective of FF vs crop.

True, because the f/number is a property intrinsic to the lens. However, if you frame a shot identically on APS-C and FF with the same focal length lens, you'd need an f/1.8 lens on APS-C to match the DoF of f/2.8 on FF. Not a lots of options in the f/1.8 zoom lens category...

 

[Terry Rogers]

If I were you, I'd sell the 7d and 17-55 to get a 6d...
You'll see why after you get your 24-70 ii!

+1

 

[thfifthcrouch]

Actually there is a 1.8f-stop zoom for crop frame cameras. The new sigma 18-35mm and I have seen some sample images and it seems nothing short of amazing. At least to me.

 

[Loswr]

Actually there is a 1.8f-stop zoom for crop frame cameras. The new sigma 18-35mm and I have seen some sample images and it seems nothing short of amazing. At least to me.

Yes, that's why I stated, "Not a lot of options," as opposed to, "No options."