Recommendation for general purpose lens

[darthdeus]

Recently I got to try 5D mk. II with the EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM lens.

So far I've got myself 1000D with the EF 50mm f/1.8 and EF-S 55-250mm IS f/4-5.6, however after trying that 24-105mm on fullframe, I'd love to buy something with equivalent (please don't kill me for saying this) usability.

After trying lens with USM, it feels like it takes forever to focus without it. My budget is around $800, so the only L lenses that would fit there are EF 17-40 and 70-200mm both f/4. As the 70-200mm on my 1000D would end up being 112-320 on fullframe, it's not really a general purpose lens anymore.

I'd love to upgrade to 5D in nearest future, but that's couple months from now at best, probably more like a year when I think realistically.

I keep thinking about the 17-40mm, as I could use it even after I upgrade to fullframe, and right now it would work as 26-64mm. The question is whether it isn't better to buy a EF-S lens with possibly better properties for my 1000D and then sell it after I get my 5D.

I also thought about buying alternative Sigma or Tamron, but I didn't find any suitable candidate. One that comes to my mind is Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8, but it doesn't have USM. Are these lenses even comparable to the 17-40mm in quality?

Are there any other alternatives in this price range? What would you suggest?

[OsmosisStudios]

Are you looking for a lens that'll replicate that zoom range (35mm equiv of 24-105) or are you looking for an L?

If you're looking for something in the same range, then you'll want something thats essentially a 15-70. Luckily, Canon make a 15-85 lens, but it's not an L (it is a USM, however).

If you're looking for an L, then just get the 24-105.

[inkista]

I'd also say the crop-body equivalent to the 24-105 is the EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. It's in the $700 price range.

The 17-40L might be the closest approximation, but it's f/4 and non-IS. The IS on the 24-105 is what makes its being an f/4 more usable. And if you really want to get into Ls, you really want a four-figure budget for a lens.

While it's nice to think about getting glass that's going to still be compatible with a full-frame, realistically, unless you're just on the cusp of getting one, it may be better to go with a good EF-S lens that will retain its value well, and then just sell it when you do make the move. The longer it's going to be until you get the full frame, the longer you're going to be using a lens that's an approximate fit.

And I say that as someone who bought the 24-105L to use on an XT. I enjoyed it, but it wasn't on my camera that often, compared to my beloved primes, mostly because of the not-so-wide-on-a-crop factor. Now that I have a 5Dii, it's my default lens and I love it three times more.

[RichardTaylor]

I have the Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 and if you are looking for fast focussing you will be disappointed.

Beside the USM are you looking for anything for any thing wider 50mm?

If 24mm on your existing camera would be wide enough then why not save up a few more $$$ and get the 24-105?

Also think long term.
Will you sell your exiting body or keep it?

My main general purpose lens is a 24-105 (on a 5D)
I usually supplement it on shoots with my 40D (or 350D (rebel Xt))
with a longer/wider/faster lens depending on what and where I am shooting.

[darthdeus]

I'm definitely going to sell my 1000D once I get myself to upgrade, as I don't see it being of any use after that. Maybe only for some more adrenaline activites where I would be too scared to take 5D with a $$$$ lens, but I guess a little p&s camera would be much better for such a thing.

It might be useful to have it around with a telephoto lens, but I guess the crop factor equals out the higher quality at which 5D would take the shot, so I won't get much advantage there.

I guess the real question here is for what % of the original price can I sell a used lens. But I guess saving up for the 24-105 is probably the best choice, as it's going to stay with me for ever

I'm still thinking about the 17-40 though, as it will work similarly on 1000D as the 24-105 on 5D, as I would like to get it later on too. Does IS matter that much at only 40mm? I can see it being great help while using my 55-250, but I generally don't have a problem with the 50mm (yes I know, it's f/1.8).

[RichardTaylor]

Re the IS @ 40mm.

If shooting hand held static subjects, in low light , it can matter especially with an F4 lens.
For subjects that move, not so good, unless you want to show movement.

Some examples - all taken with a 5D + 24-105 lens (all hand held)

(1)

Camera Canon EOS 5D
Exposure 0.067 sec (1/15)
Aperture f/5
Focal Length 24 mm
ISO Speed 1600

(2)

Camera Canon EOS 5D
Exposure 0.05 sec (1/20)
Aperture f/5.0
Focal Length 28 mm
ISO Speed 1600
Exposure Bias -2/3 EV

(3)

Camera Canon EOS 5D
Exposure 0.067 sec (1/15)
Aperture f/6.3
Focal Length 28 mm
ISO Speed 1600

(4)

Camera Canon EOS 5D
Exposure 0.077 sec (1/13)
Aperture f/4
Focal Length 24 mm
ISO Speed 800
Exposure Bias 0 EV