My Canon 17-85mm f/4-5.6 died and was all I knew. Opinions on 24-105mm f/4L IS?

I have a 60D.
(I also have Canon 100mm macro, 50mm 1.8, 10-22 wide angle, 70-200mm f/ 2.8, and 18-55 kit lens.)

I had a 17-85mm f/4-5.6 as my walkaround lens since 2004 and was quite happy with the range.  However, this lens is sadly deceased. I need a new walkaround, all purpose lens.

I am looking to upgrade in quality and am seriously looking at the 24-105mm f/4L IS, but I am not near anyplace where I can get my hands on one physically to try it out. I know there are limitations with low light -but 95% of my shooting is outdoor, still,  daytime landscapes. I am curious to hear about the range on a crop sensor camera such as the 60D. How would it compare to what I am used to?

I am not a professional and was hoping to get some feedback from anyone who has used the 17-85mm and found something as good or better. Or, feedback from anyone currently using the 24-105mm on a 60D or similar.

Any comments on a good quality walkaround lens are welcome. My budget is $1000 or below.

Thanks very much,

jonalisa

jonalisa wrote:

I have a 60D.
(I also have Canon 100mm macro, 50mm 1.8, 10-22 wide angle, 70-200mm f/ 2.8, and 18-55 kit lens.)

I had a 17-85mm f/4-5.6 as my walkaround lens since 2004 and was quite happy with the range.  However, this lens is sadly deceased. I need a new walkaround, all purpose lens.

I am looking to upgrade in quality and am seriously looking at the 24-105mm f/4L IS, but I am not near anyplace where I can get my hands on one physically to try it out. I know there are limitations with low light -but 95% of my shooting is outdoor, still,  daytime landscapes. I am curious to hear about the range on a crop sensor camera such as the 60D. How would it compare to what I am used to?

I am not a professional and was hoping to get some feedback from anyone who has used the 17-85mm and found something as good or better. Or, feedback from anyone currently using the 24-105mm on a 60D or similar.

Any comments on a good quality walkaround lens are welcome. My budget is $1000 or below.

Depending on what's wrong with the 17-85 (the common flexicable failure?), the most economical solution would be to have it repaired.  Or replace it with the same ($525 new, $480 refurbished) or like:  Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 DC OS HSM ($420) or EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM ($660 with current rebate, expires Oct 27).

While you have the 10-22 to cover the wide end, I find 24-xxx to be too limiting as a walkaround lens.  With a gap between them instead of the overlap that a 15-xx or 17-xx gives, I'd end up carrying two lenses in stead of one and changing them often.

My preference was for the 15-85. YMMV.

If that sort of range is important then I'd go with the 15-85.  It is considered one of the highest quality EF-S lenses.  However, the best EF-S lens is the 17-55 f/2.8.  If you could live with 55mm on the long end then that would be the other lens to consider.

When I only had a 7D, I used the 10-22 and 24-105 as my two main lenses but you do have to change them a lot.  I think if I was to do the APS-C thing over again I'd get the 15-85 instead of those two together.

With your  budget, you have plenty of options.  Like suggested another 17-55, 18-85, or refurbished/used 24-105.  All three lens have good reviews depending on the user. I also wouldn't count out the Tamron and Sigma 17-50 either, as there are also some great reviews on those.  I believe in redundancy, thus a 17-50 and a 24-105.  Was able to get both for under $1000. 24-105 currently $635 refurbished from Canon site and the 17-50 was bought used at 6 months old for $350.  I've been in situations where I was glad I had both and would consider either to make a good walk around lens. Just another option.

jonalisa wrote:

I have a 60D.
(I also have Canon 100mm macro, 50mm 1.8, 10-22 wide angle, 70-200mm f/ 2.8, and 18-55 kit lens.)

I had a 17-85mm f/4-5.6 as my walkaround lens since 2004 and was quite happy with the range.  However, this lens is sadly deceased. I need a new walkaround, all purpose lens.

I am looking to upgrade in quality and am seriously looking at the 24-105mm f/4L IS, but I am not near anyplace where I can get my hands on one physically to try it out. I know there are limitations with low light -but 95% of my shooting is outdoor, still,  daytime landscapes. I am curious to hear about the range on a crop sensor camera such as the 60D. How would it compare to what I am used to?

I am not a professional and was hoping to get some feedback from anyone who has used the 17-85mm and found something as good or better. Or, feedback from anyone currently using the 24-105mm on a 60D or similar.

Any comments on a good quality walkaround lens are welcome. My budget is $1000 or below.

Thanks very much,

jonalisa

I really liked the 17-85 when it came out.  Used it on my Rebel and Rebel XT until I upgraded to a 40D.  At that point I went with a 17-55/2.8 IS.  Had it been available, I'd have gone with the 15-85 IS instead, trading in a bit longer reach for the constant f/2.8.

I almost bought the 24-105 instead of the 17-55 because the 24-105 works on full frame bodies.  My major gripe with the 24-105 is that it doesn't go wide enough on a APS-C sensor to serve as my walk around lens -- I borrowed a friend's 24-105 while renting a 17-55 for a week.  Swapped way too much. So I went with a 17-55 and 70-200/4L IS combination.  To this day, that's my favorite two lens combination on APS-C.

Image quality wise, the 24-105 is right there with the 17-55 at f/4 and above.

If you don't really shoot at the wide end and can live with 24mm, I think the 24-105 is a great choice. I can see pairing it with a 10-22.

Otherwise, I'd go with a 15-85.  The 17-55/2.8 is for those who really want f/2.8 constant and can live with the 55mm end; I think that group is a lot smaller than those who would be happier with the 15-85 or even the 24-105.

Thank you all so much. These are the types of comments i was hoping for. Lots of great feedback that's easily understood. As much as I was star-crossed about getting an L lens, I do think it wiser in the long run to get the lens that most compliments the way I shoot, and I think I will look harder at the 15-85mm.

Side notes: I no longer have the 17-85mm so repair is, sadly, not an option. Also, the 24-105mm refurb at the Canon store is out of stock. And the comment about using the 24-105mm and 10-22mm and having to switch lenses alot was important to know - something I really wanted to avoid. (I find I tend to forego the shot if it's a pain to have to carry a bag and change out the lenses. Lazy, I know.)

Thank you again for all your help. It is much appreciated and i learned a lot.

jonalisa

If you won't miss the wide end, then the 24-105 L would be a good choice.  I just got one from the Canon refurb store for less than $750 (same as new without the box).  If you don't mind older but looking for less $$$, find a good used 24-85 for around $100-150 ... excellent lens when stopped down to 5.6 or so.  As stated earlier the 15-85 would be an excellent choice, especially if you want the wide end without having to change lenses.