Advice: 10-22 + 24-105 or 17-55 ? (600D)

[cpsimit]

Having got into photography as a hobby I'm now wanting to invest in some decent lenses but I have been stuck trying to decide between two for awhile; the 17-55 and 24-105 (to go with a 10-22). If I'm going to spend a fair bit of money on lenses I just want to make sure I make the right choice.

Here's my thoughts so far...



Pros for 24-105:

- Build quality
- Focal range
- Can be used If I ever go full frame (that's if)
- Would be a better combination with the 10-22

Cons for 24-105:


- Not very wide on a 600D
- F/4 isn't great for indoor
- Not as sharp as the 17-55



Pros for 17-55:

- Image quality
- Fast F/2.8
- Good for indoors/ low light
- Wide enough for landscapes


Cons for 17-55:

- Build quality
- Same focal range as my kit lens
- Focal range crosses with 10-22
- Is F/2.8 that much different?



Any advice/experience?

 

[cpsimit]

What's wrong with the build quality of the 17-55? On a crop it's a no contest with the 24-105. 17-55 every time. Image quality and 2.8 wins out for my usage. 24mm wouldn't be wide enough for any landscape work I did and would mean I then needed a 10-22 to fill the gap.

If your thinking of going FF then maybe but I'd still look at a second hand 24-70 rather than 24-105, which really is master of nothing other than being a kit lens to lob with a FF camera.

I wouldn't say anything is wrong with the build quality, it just doesn't feel as solid as the 24-105 that's all. Plus I've read about dust issues, not too sure how much of a problem it is.

No plan of going FF for now but just trying to future proof myself if I'm spending that kind of money on a lens I guess.

With regards to the 10-22, I'm buying that lens as well anyway but I'd rather not have to swap between lenses every two minutes if you know what I mean.

 

[cpsimit]

10-22 & 24-105, but I would say that, I own them, 7D body.

When I had a kit lens on my 450D 55mm was forever too short, I bought a 55-250 (best budget lens evah!) but then found I was always swapping between the two.
I used a friend's 24-105, it just worked out nicely as a walk around and cut down the need to swap lenses all the time.
I don't buy the "its not wide enough" thing for a walk around, I've never struggled.
The good thing is there are loads of these around, I bought a brand new one as a "white box", which means it came with a 5D Mk2 as a kit lens, £600. Bargain.

10-22 is a great lens, no worries there.

As an alternative, budget option I'd suggest considering the 15-85 too. Its still EF-S but might just be wide enough and still be long enough for a walk around, granted its a bit slow at the long end but for £500 it might tell you what you do/don't want or like and then you could sell it on and buy the expensive stuff a bit later.. for example if you did do full frame you might look to the 17-40 and a 70-200 ? who knows. My Dad has a poorly kit lens right now so I've suggested this as a hop up, both IQ and focal range wise.

Don't confuse me anymore! lol

I did look at possibly getting the 15-85 just to see which end I'd use more before investing in some decent lenses like you said.

Before selling my 18-55 kit lens I found myself using the shorter end rather than the longer but then a few times I went out with just my 50mm which made me have to use my feet more and be a bit more creative with what I took a picture of. I'm hoping having the longer end of the 24-105 will do the same.

My main concern with the 17-55, other than the dust issue, is having the same (boring) focal length as my kit lens, be it a lot sharper. And my main worry about the 24-105 is whether F/4 will be that bad for indoor and if I'll notice losing that little bit of focal range off the bottom end.

Grrrr, can't make a decision :-/

Cheers for the advice thus far though!