[DanLoc78]

I've been researching which lens I should get next. I currently own a 7D and the 24-70L. It appears that the 17-55 is a better value overall than the 16-35.

Anyone out there own the 17-55? And can you attest to its sharpness and overall image quality that I've been reading about?

[pingflood]

Unless you want to have a full frame capable lens or need weather sealing, I'd go for the 17-55 which has IS and is excellent optically.

[egordon99]

Hey! Didn't realize you switched over

Agree with Pingflood. 17-55 would be a MUCH better choice on a 7D.

Have you checked out Canon Digital Photography Forums - Powered by vBulletin ?

I have the 24-70L, because the focal length range appealed to me more than 17-55, and I have the Sigma 10-20 for my wide stuff.

[wlachan]

I have the 40D & 17-55 and it is a good lens. Build quality is good but can be better. Since you have owned the 24-70 already, I would suggest either 10-22 or 16-35 (mostly because it will be FF ready). For APS-C, 17-55 is the most useful zoom though (but then what to do with the 24-70?).

[Clicker]

Go with their "quality" line 16-35 and you'll have a weather resistant system, the 16-35 is a workhorse with some guys, you don't really need IS in the wider end. My choice is 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 for a 3 lense system that'll be sufficient for either FF or crop sensor currently i have 8-16, 15-85 and 70-200+2x extender, if Canon has a better 5DII or 1DsMIII then i'm adding 16-35 and 24-70, it takes me from medium wide to medium telephoto which is normally what most would need 90% when shooting.