Decisions, decisions...

[OutlawTorn]

I have a Sigma 17-70, 50 1.8 and Canon 70-200 f4 IS. I notice I force myself to use the 70-200 more often than I would because it is so much more fun to use than the 17-70. In fact, I even use my 70-200 for landscapes by making panos.

I would like to have some better glass to use for a smaller walk around, but I'm not all thrilled about the 50-55mm maximum focal length on many of the popular wide-to-normal zooms. I'm also not excited about requiring a 4 lens set-up to get from 10-400mm (10-22, 17-70, 70-200, 100-400). Since Im not truly pleased with the 17-70, Id have to replace or buy 3 lenses to get this set up.

If I were to ditch everything and start over with a 10-22 and 24-105 right away and picking up a 100-400 later this year, I could have a nice 3 lens set up to get out to 400mm and only have 1 lens on the “wish list”. The thing is, I have a 40D - which is a crop body. Does this proposed kit sound like a PIA waiting to happen with a lens swap required on the wide end?

I also love the IQ on the 70-200 f4IS. How much real world difference is there between the 24-105 and 70-200?

Thanks in advance for your advice.

[Steve Foss]

I think as it stands, your three-lens plan from 10-400mm (really 16-640mm with the 1.6 crop factor multiplication) is a good one. All three of those lenses are excellent quality lenses capable of beautiful image quality.

And if down the road you switch to a 1.3 crop or full frame sensor, it's a simple matter to sell the 10-22 and buy a 17-40 on the used market (or trade even up), and you won't be out any money.

For what it's worth, covering every speck of the focal range from 16 to 640mm is overrated.

I've got two 1.3 crop sensor bodies, a 17-40L, 50 f1.8 (nifty fifty), 70-200 f2.8L IS, 100 f2.8 macro, 400 f5.6L and 1.4 TC. If I really feel the need, I can strap the 1.4 on the 70-200 to get out to 280mm, but that still leaves a 120mm gap between 280 and 400mm, and there's also a gap between 40 and 70mm. Doesn't really matter much at all, because in almost all situations I can zoom in or out to cover those smallish gaps by using my feet.

As for the diff between the 24-105 and 70-200, are you asking about differences in image quality? If so, they are neck and neck. Especially with a full-frame camera, the 24-105 is one of the most highly regarded walkaround and wedding lenses out there, beacause that focal range on full-frame covers a TON of situations. Also, if you end up full frame and don't really care much for ultrawide, you could dump the 17-40 and simply use the 24-105 for wide angle. In that situation I'd personally keep the 17-40 for those times when you really want ultrawide, but true 24mm is wide enough for most applications. Just some food for thought.

[OutlawTorn]

Youre right about not needing every mm covered. If I keep my current set up, I have no problem with gaps between something like the 17-55 and 70-200 or the 70-200 and 400 5.6.

My concerns are mostly around the IQ between 24-105 and 70-200 (thanks for getting rid of that one Steve) and the potentially frequent lens swap between the 10-22 and 24-105. I guess the swap from the 17-55 to 70-200 would be just as frequent as the 10-22 to 24-105 and a landscape shot isnt going anywhere fast, whereas something in the 60 mm range could be running.

[Dbl]

Frankly I don't spend a lot of time thinking about focal lengths. I shoot mainly primes for sports so I don't have as many options. I will say this I shoot three lenses 99% of the time, no matter what the subject. 17-40, 70-200/2.8 and 300/2.8. I have plenty of lenses but when I travel two lenses ALWAYS go with me, the 17-40 and the 70-200.

My main focus is sports hence my lens lineup but I've used my 300 for portraits, sort-of macros or whatever I need at the time. Would I like something wider than the 17-40, yes but I've shot a lot various subjects with that lens and just made do. Sometimes I might have to shoot a two shot pano to get wide enough for a landscape shot I want or an interior shot.

Most important to me are lens quality, speed of focus, aperture, and I prefer fixed aperture not variable. I have wanted a 400/2.8 for years, but can't justify the cost or the fact it won't make me any more income, I have wanted a 15mm fisheye for years, just won't use it that much. I've wanted a 10-22 but don't use EFS lenses because I shoot 1.3 and 1.6 crops. The bottom line is find a couple of lenses that are lenses you will use and use often! Don't be overly concerned if they don't cover all the focal lengths. Be concerned that you will have a lens lineup that you will use. Its amazing how well you adapt to shooting with what you have.

Good luck with your decision.

[OutlawTorn]

You guys are both spot on with not needing to cover every mm - I didnt pick these lenses to do that, it just worked out that way. 99.99% of my shots are outside and are taken while Im doing something else, like hunting, fishing, backpacking, hiking, etc.

Small, light packages are the name of the game - thats why the 2.8 zooms are out. I also like that the three lenses Im considering all have the same filter size.

I just listed the 17-70 and 70-200 on POTN, here and hsolist - the 17-70 just sold. Cant wait to sell the 70-200 so I can go play on BH Photo for a while!

Thanks for the comments guys!

[Steve Foss]

Good luck on the 70-200 sale. That lens is a light, fast shooting and high quality sweetheart.

[OutlawTorn]

Well the 70-200 sold...still waiting on the 17-70 though. Cant wait until the 24-105 gets here this afternoon. New lens day is always exciting...

Im going to Gooseberry Falls early one morning this weekend to get some shots of the frozen falls. Should be a nice field test.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Congrats on the new glass-same here. A buddy told me he saw a big Canon lens at a pawn shop,I said "was it white?" nope. I figured I'd find a 75-300mm,checked it out anyway,turned out to be a 180mm L Macro! They were asking a whole $500 for it,but I got the guy down to $200 plus I have to do a family portrait for him.

I'm hoping that this weekend I can also get out for more than an hour! Be sure to post your results,I'll try to do the same.

[OutlawTorn]

Wow, thats a fantastic deal...what pawn shop was that?

[MARINERMAGNUM]

One down in Waterloo. I guess the guy was from out of state and tried to sell them a handgun first,when that was a no go,he sold them his 40D an a couple lenses. The pawnshop owner kept the 40D and 17-85mm for himself.