Newbie Canon 7D Owner - What Lens?

FirstRays

Hello Folks

I just upgraded to a Canon 7D from my Rebel T1i.... I am using the kit lens from my Rebel T1i (18-55mm IS) as a walk-around lens on my 7D for the time being. In due course, I want to upgrade to a sharper lens with better color-rendition for general purpose use.

What is a good upgrade option (sharper optics, better bokeh) for a walk around lens for the 7D?

A. 15-85mm
B. 24-105 F/4 L
C. 24-70 F/2.8 L
D. 17-55 F/2.8 L

So many choices - am pretty confused

TIA,
First.

pmaxwell

if it is just to upgrade the walk around lens then either the 24-105 or 24-70 will work very nicely. I'm a new 7D owner as well, and it is a great camera. I love it so far.

FirstRays

Yes, forgot to mention - these are the lenses I currently own:

a. Canon 18-55mm IS Kit Lens
b. Canon 70-200mm F/4L
c. Sigma 10-20mm Wide-Angle.

Looking to upgrade option (a) above with something better. One point I'm concerned about with the 24-* series - on a crop body they become 36-*.... Not nearly as wide. Has anyone felt that as a limiting factor for a walk-around lens?

I love the 7D so far - its so much of a pleasure to shoot compared to my Rebel

pmaxwell

the sigma is a great wide angle, and the 70-200 is great as well (I have them both). With those in mind, if it were me it would definitely be one of the 24 - X lenses on your lis. I have the 24 105 and it works very well, though I occasionally wish it were a 2.8 (though not often)

Wachel

My 17-55 is my go to lens on my 7D. My other workhorse is my 70-200 2.8 IS II

ThatCanonGuy

I'd get the 17-55 IS. It's basically a 24-70 designed for crop cameras. The equivalent focal length is around 24-70. It has IS, and the 24-70 doesn't. It has the f/2.8 aperture, and the 24-105 doesn't. The 17-55 IS isn't an L, but it has L image quality and features (I've heard it lacks L build quality, but I've never used it).

Another option would be the 17-40 f4L. It makes a good general lens on a crop camera. It is an L, but it doesn't have f/2.8 like the 17-55 does. You can use the 17-40L on full frame (FF) if you decide to go that route. You can't use the 17-55 on an FF camera.

The 15-85 is supposedly a good lens, but I really don't know much about it and can't comment on it.

I'd get the 17-55, but the 17-40 definitely has its advantages.

ziggy53

The Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f2.8 IS USM is a wonderful standard zoom for a Canon 7D. While it's not an "L" lens in name, the optical qualities are very much "L" territory. It's an excellent lens to combine with the Sigma 10-20mm and Canon 70-200mm, f4L.

I have a travel kit with just those lenses, and it's very enabling. If you add a Canon 500D closeup diopter for the 70-200mm, it's also very capable for flowers and larger bugs, etc., and the 500D doesn't take up much room at all.

NagoC50

Agree 100% w/ Ziggy and CanonGuy. I've got a 17-55 for my 7D (and also the 24-70 for my full frame) and the 17-55 is every bit an "L" lens optically. Not as silky smooth zoom ring as the 24 and the lens hood is not included as it is with the L lens (a bit of a bummer as it is quite close to L territory price-wise). I would only go for the 24 to 70 if you felt that a full frame camera was in your short term future.

FirstRays

Thanks for all the replies folks! That makes it clearer - looks like the 17-55 is the best option out there for the 7D.

codrus

It really depends on your shooting style. Personally, I own both the 17-55 and the 24-105, and I find that I use the latter a lot more often than the former on my 50D. It's not that I don't like the quality of the 17-55 (on the contrary, it's a great lens), it's just that I use 55-104 a lot more often than 17-24.

Might be worth looking at the shots you did with your 18-55, and seeing how many of them are wider than 24.

--Ian

Green_Hornet

Check teh focal length you need.

24-something is too long for my taste.

I use the 15-85 on my 7D as a walkaround lens. The only downside might be, that it is a bit slow (3.5-5.6). But the image & built quality is very good.
The 17-55 should also be a good lens, but I dont have it.

/Jan

pmaxwell

The Sigma you have covers the wide end very well, and is perhaps my favorite overall lens. That is why I tend to like the reach of the 24-105, but like a poster said above, that depends on how often you spend shooting that end of the zoom range.

FirstRays

Thanks for all the advice. I went and looked at all my photos (www.satishmohanphotography.com) and I seem to have an inclination for the wider side

I wish the 17-55 had the "L" designation on it (red stripe and all that) - for being >$1K :-)

puzzledpaul

FirstRays wrote: »

I wish the 17-55 had the "L" designation on it (red stripe and all that) - for being >$1K :-)

I've no experience with this lens, but several Canon macro lenses fit into the 'L' class regarding IQ - but no red stripe
eg
mpe-65
100mm macro usm (and, in fact the orig non usm version too)

I generally 'mucky up' my L stuff anyway.

pp

Brett1000

FirstRays wrote: »

Hello Folks

I just upgraded to a Canon 7D from my Rebel T1i.... I am using the kit lens from my Rebel T1i (18-55mm IS) as a walk-around lens on my 7D for the time being. In due course, I want to upgrade to a sharper lens with better color-rendition for general purpose use.

What is a good upgrade option (sharper optics, better bokeh) for a walk around lens for the 7D?

A. 15-85mm
B. 24-105 F/4 L
C. 24-70 F/2.8 L
D. 17-55 F/2.8 L

So many choices - am pretty confused
.

On a crop the Canon 17-55 2.8 is the best (but expensive), my choice would be the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS HSM or the Tamron 17-50 2.8