Robert Pete 
, Jan 31, 2012; 11:28 a.m.
I'd like to get some feedback on lens choices..I'm about to buy a 7D and I'm wondering what lens to buy first. I'm tossing up the idea of either the Canon 24-105mm F4L or the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8. I shoot 90% landcape, abandoned buildings, but I have the opportunity to start portrait/model work. Any ideas would be fabulous!
Rob Bernhard 
, Jan 31, 2012; 11:37 a.m.
Neither of those lenses is particularly wide on the 7D due to the reduced sensor size. Only you can say if the equivalent field of view would make sense for your own photography.
Matthijs Claessen 
, Jan 31, 2012; 11:41 a.m.
Do you prefer details or sweeping landscapes/entire buildings?
For details a longer lens like 24-105 is fine. Otherwise a little wider (17-55/2.8 or 15-85) or even a lot wider would be
better.
The same goes for portraits; environmental, tight? Shallow depth of field?
There's a lot to choose from.
More info would help.
M.
Robert Pete , Jan 31, 2012; 12:02 p.m.
Matthijs..I'm a details kinda guy, especially with landscapes..I should also mention that I will have regular access to the Canon 16-35mm F2.8L and the Canon 70-200mm F2.8L, but won't be keeping those in my bag. With portraits, I like the look of great background blur. Better?
Jay DeSimone 
, Jan 31, 2012; 12:09 p.m.
Until I recently got the Sigma 17-50, the 24-105 practically lived on my 7D, and it stays in my bag. It's a great lens, and I have no reservations in recommending it, especially since you have access to a wider lens. I valued IS and the added range over the one extra stop of aperture.
Robert Pete , Jan 31, 2012; 12:30 p.m.
Thanks Jay!
Its nice to here from someone that actually knows how to answer a simple question..some people here get way too technical with their answers to simple questions!
I've also thought about the Sigma 17-50..maybe I should take a second look at that lens to add to my purchase :-)
Robert Pete , Jan 31, 2012; 12:45 p.m.
Ok, here's another one..between the Canon 24-105mm F4L vs. the Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX..which one would you buy first?
Romuald Janik , Jan 31, 2012; 12:55 p.m.
Since you are thinking of Sigma 17-50 you could also consider the Canon 17-55/2.8 IS. Very good image quality, and the IS helps a lot in low light. I used it on a 350D and now it is a principal walk-around zoom on my 7D.
Since I like also close ups/details I often walk around with the 70-200/4L...
Out of the two lenses that you mention I would choose the 24-105 (for the focal range.. - I had no first hand experience)
JDM von Weinberg 
, Jan 31, 2012; 01:05 p.m.
You also need to take a good, hard look at the Canon EF-S 15-85mm lens. It has the additional virtue of being able to get in very close (although like all of these zooms, it's not a true macro).
It's a wonderful lens covering from a nice wide angle to a telephoto range -- it is simply the EF-S (APS-C. "crop") equivalent of the older EF 24-105mm lens you are considering. Some people are happy with nothing on the wide end (24mm is a 'normal' lens on the 7D). I personally would find "regular access" availability of a wider (the 16mm) to be too limiting unless you carry it regularly and swap.
Its nice to here from someone that actually knows how to answer a simple question..some people here get way too technical with their answers to simple questions!
It's also not nice to gripe about people who have taken the time to try to answer your "simple" question.
If agreement with your original, and apparently preferred, choice is the criterion, just go ahead and get the lens you want.
Robert Pete , Jan 31, 2012; 01:12 p.m.
Thank you Romuald.
I won't buy a Canon lens unless it's an "L" and has IS..same goes with a Sigma and the "EX" line with OS. What can I say, I'm picky :-)
