acerl310 10:10am, 28 September 2009
Their price is almost the same... Basically, the only thing different between the two is the first one is an L lens while the other is not(but it has IS).
foTobias. 9 years ago
no - the difference is their focal-length, i guess you are using an 1,6 crop sensor to think of the efs one, do you need wide-angle or do you need more of a tele-lens?
acerl310 9 years ago
I just need a good all around lens... The funny thing is, I already have a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

Is it reasonable to purchase the 17-55mm or is it just plain "redundant?"
foTobias. 9 years ago
do you want that focal length? and do you want the wider aperture? I wanted the aperture, but i use almost only tele (70-200 2,8) so for me the 17-55 would be silly, but for you? only you know.
acerl310 9 years ago
I thought long and hard on this one (again). Now, for the second time, I decided to go for the 24-70mm. Mainly because it's the same "toy" if I get the 17-55mm because I already have a 18-55mm....

I hope this is the last decision that I would make for this kind of stuff. It's giving me too much stress... and that's weird, I guess.

Well, thanks for the quick response!
congrats..good luck....

i went nuts over it too, bought the 24-70 then sold it for the 24-105...

its what you like and what you shoot and how you shoot!

i dont mind shooting at 800 iso instead of 400 iso or 1600 iso instead of 800...or even 3200 instead of 1600... but my pictures are for me so it snot a big deal...the is helps but not if your shooting to stop movement..

basically its up to you!

theres many many discussions of the matter... but its still up to you!
Sandy Phimester 9 years ago
You will love the 24-70! It's the best quality zoom out there in this range. There is a reason why it is such a classic lens!
acerl310 9 years ago
Wow, for the sake of having a new "toy" to play with, I'll go with the 24-70mm instead of the 17-55mm since I have a similar lens already, 18-55mm.

Okay... my mind right now... is... like:
24-70mm = 90%
18-55mm = 10%

I'll try them both in the camera shop \m/ I'm going to try to make the flares show up, I heard the 18-55mm shows flare... and I saw some too(too bad I forgot the link)
33L 9 years ago
I played with my mates 18-55, and i have the 24-70L, it felt like a toy to me. now this is probably because i wasused to the 24-70L and that the 18-55 is so much lighter (a good reason to think twice about both of them)
Optically i didnt notice any major reduction in performance.. not that i was looking but the firt thing that struck me is the barrel extension is greater than the 24-70L and not shielded from the elements so it would make me feel a little nervous using it in anything but light drizzle!
acerl310 9 years ago
@33L I'm planning to buy a B+W filter:D I don't non to happen what my other non-L lenses experienced. They received rain drops on their front elements, finger prints and moisture:O WITHOUT A FILTER!!! I do have one Canon UV filter but when I removed it, I noticed that my photo became noticeably sharper. Plus, I saw a photo around here of a 24-70mm that fell to the ground. Good thing he had a helopian filter WHICH took the damage(not the lens).By damage, I meant it got cracks all over it.
foTobias. 9 years ago
have you got it yet? and played around yet?
Groups Beta