Canon 24MM STM or 24-105?

[Dylanlewis2000]

For years I have had my lovely 18-200 Canon walk about which has served its purpose. In addition to this i have used a 50mm which gives superbly sharp results. Of late I have started to think that maybe I should look at using a prime instead of the 18-200 all of the time. Image quality is quite important to me so and so is price. I have been looking around and the 24mm STM gets seemingly good reviews. On the other hand for a few quid more i see that the 24-105L has dropped in price significantly on the second hand market. I have always liked the idea of the L glass but reviews from years ago put me off as people stated that it wasn't really that sharp.

I'm off on a holiday touring the west coast of America in two weeks (LA >> Pismo >> San Fran >> Yosemite >> Vegas) so will be taking my 400D with me. I guess my question is is the 24mm worth it? or should i sell some of the other gear and put that towards the purchase cost?

 

[StewartR]

Which focal lengths do you actually use?

 

[tijuana taxi]

24mm gives an equivalent view of 35mm when used on a crop sensor camera such as the 400d.

Might you not want something wider if you have been used to a 18-200, especially on a trip to somewhere like Yosemite

My preference would be an EF-S 17-55 IS, constant f/2.8 and gives excellent results, my favourite lens when I had a 40d

 

[Dylanlewis2000]

Well going back a few years I bought a 17-85 is and found that the 85 wasn't long enough. When on holiday I took a 90-300mm lens but was left frustrated having to change lenses all of the time hence forth why I purchased the 18-200. I love the sharpness of the 50mm so would be disappointed if the 24mm was considerably softer. The reasoning behind the 24-105L was just a based on price; having seen them for £300+.