Announcement

**Colin** · 14-08-2011, 06:49

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

24-105 Great lens imho I recently bought it to replace my Sigma 17-70 which is a very good lens. with the pixel count of the 7D my suggestion would be to go for an L lens, the shortcomings of my old 17-70 were clear when used on a friends 7D.

**KEITH H** · 14-08-2011, 07:37

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

I am using older cameras so my reply may not be that helpful (5D mk1 & 1D mk2n), but for what it is worth.
I have just replaced an old EF 28-80mm f/2.8L with a 24-105L.
On the plus side, a bit wider, a bit longer, a little sharper, much less flare (I used a lens hood with the old lens all the time which made the lens look even bigger), IS as a bonus, it is about 200g lighter.
Down sides are, the 24-105 is a little slower to focusing than the 28-80 was and I do miss shooting at f/2.8 for those shallow DOF shots, it vignettes quite badly at 24mm on the 5D.
(As I also use a 50mm f/1.4 the low light / wide aperture situations are covered)

**Jules** · 14-08-2011, 08:28

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

Two counts for the 24-105 then, had one before with the 5d MkII, will look up some images...

**SamFisher** · 14-08-2011, 09:51

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

make that 3 counts.

Mike

**Jules** · 14-08-2011, 10:49

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

IT'S A CONSPIRACY!!!
(I love a good conspiracy theory!)

**Northman** · 14-08-2011, 10:53

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

Another vote for the 24-105 L. I had a 17-85 on my 20D which was replaced by a 5D II and 24 - 105L kit last year. OK the camera is a big upgrade but the 24 - 105 L is far superior to the 17 - 85. You need good glass on a high megapixel camera, which may suggest using prime lenses, but the 24-105L is a superb lens - many supporting reviews on the net. The 24 - 70 L has a wider aperture, but how often do you really need that. The 24 - 105 L had IS and a wider range which more or less covers your 22 - 100 requirement. I also have a 50 1.8 EF and a Sigma 85 1.4 for specific purposes, but the 24 - 105 L is the default all purpose lens.

**Gordon_H** · 14-08-2011, 15:44

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

Even though i've only recently purchased the 24-105 L i have to say compared to my previous lenses it is top draw ! I'm glad some of my canon using friends recommended it and i took notice !
(they also all recommended the Sigma 10-20 but were split on the 70-300........)

**DrJon** · 14-08-2011, 17:57

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

Nope, sorry, was about to say 24-105 but you have a 7D so you want a 17-55 f2.8, really, honest... well, unless you see a 5DmkII in your future, no, you still do...
My friend bought one (and a 60D) a week ago and the results are even better than I expected.
I'll have to ask permission to post some of his test photos.
Staggeringly sharp and the out-of-focus stuff looks, well, nicely blurry...
(Basically the same size and weight as a 24-105 (tho a teeny bit cheaper) but you get the wide end and an extra stop, which is dead useful on a camera which throws in some extra bonus depth-of-field without you asking for it.)
IMHO, of course...
John

**Hereford_EOS2** · 14-08-2011, 21:29

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

After following many reviews over the past 2 years I can suggest all of the lenses in your list.
The EF-S 15-85mm was (IMO) designed for the 7D in the same was that the EF 24-105mm (IMO) was designed for the 5D markII.
Yet the EF 24-70mm & the EF-S 17-55mm are both f/2.8 therefore faster and better in low light.

EF-S is only compatable with crop cameras (7D, 60D etc) whilst EF lenses work on both crop & full-frame cameras.

Ask yourself the questions:
1. Will I upgrade to FF in the near future? (EF or EF-S)
2. Will I shoot indoors or in low light? (f/2.8 or not)
3. What is my budget? (�500, �600, �700, �800, �1000 or more)
4. What will be the main application of this new lens?
5. Do I need IS? (all have IS except the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L)

Just my penny worth

**briansquibb** · 14-08-2011, 22:31

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

17-55 does not fill the 55-100 gap so that is no good then ....

Might as well suggest the 135 f2 - superb quality better bokeh than the 17-55 - oh wait a minute - it doesn't meet the criteria - why not the 85mm f1.2?

As you are thinking of a ff (or why not a series 1?) it seems pointless even considering and ef-s lens

I go with the 24-105 as it is an excellent walkabout lens

**Woolley** · 14-08-2011, 22:44

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

I know 22=10-22 so that's the wide end covered.

100mm I presume is a prime (macro?)

Obvious choices are 24-105 or 24-70. Decision between those is how much weight do you want to cart around and how much do you need f/2.8? If the answers are 'not too much' and 'rarely' then you'll go with the 24-105 as I did, but if you want low-light capability and don't carry it far the 24-70 is better. Personally I think the 7D/105 combo feels as if they're made for each other, even though I know that the 24-105 is really meant for the 5D.

On the other hand, if the 100mm is a bit specialist then I'd say seriously consider the 50mm f/1.4 or 1.8 + the 70-200 f/4. It'll mean more lens changing but in return for generally superior IQ and a much longer top end, to which you can add a 1.4x later if you feel the need.

**briansquibb** · 14-08-2011, 22:55

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

Wooley - Jules needs something to fill between the 10-22 and his 100-400

**briansquibb** · 15-08-2011, 00:29

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

I expect someone will say that the 24-105 can't manage in low light - just to prove that it can ..... one I took hand held earlier today in a crypt, straight from DPP, no pp

5dII, 24-105F4L@92mm, f4, 1/80, iso12800

**Jules** · 15-08-2011, 07:25

Re: Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

Originally posted by Hereford_EOS2 View Post

After following many reviews over the past 2 years I can suggest all of the lenses in your list.
The EF-S 15-85mm was (IMO) designed for the 7D in the same was that the EF 24-105mm (IMO) was designed for the 5D markII.
Yet the EF 24-70mm & the EF-S 17-55mm are both f/2.8 therefore faster and better in low light.

EF-S is only compatable with crop cameras (7D, 60D etc) whilst EF lenses work on both crop & full-frame cameras.

Ask yourself the questions:
1. Will I upgrade to FF in the near future? (EF or EF-S)
2. Will I shoot indoors or in low light? (f/2.8 or not)
3. What is my budget? (�500, �600, �700, �800, �1000 or more)
4. What will be the main application of this new lens?
5. Do I need IS? (all have IS except the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L)

Just my penny worth

Had a 5DMKII Before and I wouldn't want another, MKIII Now that could be different but then the APSC will come good again about 18 mnth later, so t goes around, short answer is I just don't know, the game is always to buy with the future in mind. This time however I'm buying for the now! I am pretty sure a newer 1DS 4/5DMKIII Will garner a new Standard Zoom too, it's been a few years now hasn't it?
So I'll likely get whats best for the 7D for now, if I'm ever going to be in the position to buy a 5DMKIII I'll get the new Lens with it, assuming there is one but I'd be suprised if the 1D/5D come out without...

Announcement

Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

Filling the Gap between 22 and 100mm...

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment