I thought about the same combination. Optically and mechanically, the 17-55
2.8IS excellent and a 2.8 image stabilised zoom is just awesome.
However, for me personally, I looked through all the previous shots I had
taken with my camera and most of my 'zoom lens' walkaround shots were
between 24mm and 85mm. Therefore, it is just a tad too short for my use.
Also, I think it is overpriced for a non 'L' lens.
For my shooting needs, the 24-70 2.8 would be the perfect zoom lens, however
the lens hood is very big and therefore a bit clumsy for a walkaround lens
(people have complained about the weight, but this isn't a problem). It is
daunting when you point the 24-70 at people, which is the biggest problem
for me.
This left me contemplating the 24-105. Some of my previous indoor shots, I
really needed 2.8 or greater to get a useable shutter speed. So, the 24-105
isn't ideal as it's a bit slow, so I would need to use primes in these
conditions. Also, the shallower depth of field of the 2.8 is handy.
So, after contemplating what walkaround lens to choose for about 8 months,
my money is still in my pocket, but I think it's going to be the 24-105,
10-22 for wide shots and use of primes as much as possible, when I can get
away without using a zoom. Oh and my 70-200, which I love.
"Rob B" <rob.flyboy RemoveThis @NObtinternetSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:HJCdnWIz8eH1yn7ZRVnysQ@bt.com...
> Hi Guys,
>
> I'm contemplating buying the new EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS lens from Canon.
> I'll be using it on a 30D.
> If you have any comments to make about the lens's optical or mechanical
> performance, I'd sure like to hear them before I buy.
>
> Best Regards... Rob.
>
>
> >> Stay informed about: Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS...Comments Please...