24-70 vs 17-55 on 60D


Feb 26, 2012
35
0
0
23
#1
Hey guys, I need help. Is the 24-70 a good walkabout lens and is it also good for night photography?
 

Oct 1, 2011
1,799
0
0
Planet Earth
#2
Haiya. I'm a Nikon user but I had this dilemma too. From experience I find that the 24-70 being a ff lens gives me an awkward range. As in it is not wide enough yet usually not long enough as a walkabout lens. It starts in the middle of the mid range focal length for crop sensors so I don't find it useful. But it may be different for you :)
 

brapodam

New Member
Jun 12, 2009
1,672
4
0
AMK
#3
I'd recommend the 17-55 for a 60D, but it's personal preference really. Both are f2.8 so both will be pretty decent for night photography. Also, night photography is very vague, it can consist of street shoot, night landscape, etc. If you are going for night landscape then obviously the max aperture doesn't matter that much since you're going to stop down anyway.

Also, focal range for walkabout lenses depends a lot on your style. Most people would be more comfortable with the 17-55 range on crop, but there are some who would prefer the 24-70/24-105. Do you prefer wide or tele? If you prefer wide, then 17-55 is the way to go. Ultra wide? Then the Canon 10-22 or its third party alternatives would suit you better. If you prefer tele, none of these lenses would really suit you; you'd probably want a 24-105 or even a 70-200. If you like to have wide and tele in the same lens, then the 18-200 or its third party alternatives would be the best for you
 

Oct 1, 2011
1,799
0
0
Planet Earth
#4
brapodam said:
I'd recommend the 17-55 for a 60D, but it's personal preference really. Both are f2.8 so both will be pretty decent for night photography. Also, night photography is very vague, it can consist of street shoot, night landscape, etc. If you are going for night landscape then obviously the max aperture doesn't matter that much since you're going to stop down anyway.

Also, focal range for walkabout lenses depends a lot on your style. Most people would be more comfortable with the 17-55 range on crop, but there are some who would prefer the 24-70/24-105. Do you prefer wide or tele? If you prefer wide, then 17-55 is the way to go. Ultra wide? Then the Canon 10-22 or its third party alternatives would suit you better. If you prefer tele, none of these lenses would really suit you; you'd probably want a 24-105 or even a 70-200. If you like to have wide and tele in the same lens, then the 18-200 or its third party alternatives would be the best for you
+1 :D
 

rhino123

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 1, 2006
5,243
15
38
NA
#5
Hey guys, I need help. Is the 24-70 a good walkabout lens and is it also good for night photography?
Well... only you could answer that question and not any of us. Because different people might have different liking. I, for one, uses the 70-200mm 70% of the time even fo my streets photography... and 30% I used my 12-24mm lens.

so you got to ask yourself, which range of focal length is more comfortable to you then get that focal length and thats it.
 

tecnica

Senior Member
Dec 26, 2004
3,660
10
0
#6
Well... only you could answer that question and not any of us. Because different people might have different liking. I, for one, uses the 70-200mm 70% of the time even fo my streets photography... and 30% I used my 12-24mm lens.

so you got to ask yourself, which range of focal length is more comfortable to you then get that focal length and thats it.
agree. i will recommend the 17-55 over the 24-70L for a crop body.

however a lot of times, f2.8 isn't really that fast for night photography too.
 

Oct 1, 2011
1,799
0
0
Planet Earth
#7
tecnica said:
agree. i will recommend the 17-55 over the 24-70L for a crop body.

however a lot of times, f2.8 isn't really that fast for night photography too.
True. F2.8 is more of indoor lighting. For night shooting then primes are better
 

Feb 26, 2012
35
0
0
23
#8
Thanks guys for the great help. But im also quite worried to use the 24-70 as it doesnt have IS , which means low shutter speed without IS will be blur? Is it true?
 

brapodam

New Member
Jun 12, 2009
1,672
4
0
AMK
#9
Thanks guys for the great help. But im also quite worried to use the 24-70 as it doesnt have IS , which means low shutter speed without IS will be blur? Is it true?
Generally yes, but it depends on your hand-holding and breathing techniques. IS will definitely help, but if your hands are shaky there is only so much it can do.
 

Mar 26, 2010
409
1
18
36
singapore
#10
Hi bro. I myself used to had the same delimma as well so what i do was i rent 24-70mm at camera rental. The lend was not to my liking. Then i rent 24-105mm. The lens is good but i do not wish to lose out my wide therefore i rent myself 17-55mm and fall in love with it.

I just brought it as recenty my wife had gine crazy, told me that i was allow to buy one lens of my choice and waste no time i brought the 17-55mm.

I think it would be better for you to rent and test it yourself.
 

An drew

Senior Member
May 27, 2005
3,920
9
38
#11
I just brought it as recenty my wife had gine crazy, told me that i was allow to buy one lens of my choice and waste no time i brought the 17-55mm.
Ha ha :bsmilie:. Hope your wife is not on Clubsnap. Anyway 17-55 is great choice.
 

Feb 26, 2012
35
0
0
23
#12
Ouh ok! Thanks! But how does the 17-55 perform? Like color fringing and Flare? Then what are the people talking about dust in the lens? Sorry for the loads of questions.
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#13
Hi bro. I myself used to had the same delimma as well so what i do was i rent 24-70mm at camera rental. The lend was not to my liking. Then i rent 24-105mm. The lens is good but i do not wish to lose out my wide therefore i rent myself 17-55mm and fall in love with it.

I just brought it as recenty my wife had gine crazy, told me that i was allow to buy one lens of my choice and waste no time i brought the 17-55mm.

I think it would be better for you to rent and test it yourself.
Should have just whacked a used 400/2.8... after a few days, sell it, and use the money to get all the other toys you wanted... :p
 

tecnica

Senior Member
Dec 26, 2004
3,660
10
0
#14
17-55

colour fringing - little to none, edge only
flare - ok, not the best
dust - none

ok, buy.
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,657
68
48
lil red dot
#15
Last edited:
Feb 26, 2012
35
0
0
23
#19
So 17-55 wins over the 24-70? Its just sad that the 24-70 doesnt have IS. If it does i would not have to compare...
 

N-user

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2006
2,459
2
38
TPY
#20
So 17-55 wins over the 24-70? Its just sad that the 24-70 doesnt have IS. If it does i would not have to compare...
For your use, 17-55 make more sense..... give better range.... ya IS is useful, but till they launch a 17-55IS...... share my experience.... when I use my D700 + 700-200 push pull version... its hell of heavy..... I zoom to 200mm and can see the focusing fly all over.... my technique is lousy... so what I did was to sling the camera over the shoulder, after that, get a Hand Strap.... it help a bit to stablise the camera.... I see less shake.... since I cannot afford the VR version, this is my poor man method.... till one day I afford then maybe will change.... but at the meantime, can train my muscle.... haaaa
 

Top Bottom