UPGRADE

B

big ron

Suspended / Banned
Messages
24
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello not been on for some time, looking to upgrade to a Canon 40D or 50D with either Canon 17-55 of 24-105 lens i would appreciate some guidance to help me with my decision thanks big ron.
 
What do you shoot most of the time? The 17-55 has a constant f/2.8 aperture, which will be more useful than the 24-105mm's f/4 if low light is an issue. What focal length's do you use most of the time? Also what lens would it be replacing, and what do you find limiting about the current one?

Chris
 
I have a 100-400 lens for my wild life but was looking for a good alround lens to cover most subjects
 
Hi big ron,
my vote would be for the 24-105L as a general walkabout lens. I use mine about 90% of the time on my camera. The 24 isn't very wide on a crop body but I haven't found that to be too much of a problem so far. (I also carry an EFs 18-55IS just in case as it's small, light, cheap and can produce good pictures but then I can't compare it with a £500 Efs17-55 f2.8)
 
Big Ron. I have got a 50D and looked and thought long and hard about a lens for landscapes. In the end I went for the 17-55 EF-S over the 24-105 (which was a serious contender).

Once I bought and started using the 17-55 I realised what a great walkabout lens this was as well. The IQ is excellent, the 2.8 low light capabilities constant across the range is really useful. I did wonder if I would be lacking some reach. but really haven't noticed it to be honest.

I recommend this lens totally based on my experience, but then I have not used the 24-105. There are many on here that really rate this lens.

Good luck with your decision - I am sure it will be hard:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top