Lens for 7D Mark II

[cas1963]

Can anyone speak about using the EF 24-105 f/4 IS II, or the EF 24-70 f/4 IS USM, on a 7D Mark II? I have the EF-S 17-55, and I’m VERY  happy with it, but I am looking for something with more reach that is affordable…. Thanks in advance.

[cas1963]

One more question, the original of this lens is also available as refurb, and about 200 less than the new refurb....should I consider the older model?

[TTMartin]

---

@cas1963 wrote:

One more question, the original of this lens is also available as refurb, and about 200 less than the new refurb....should I consider the older model?

---

NO!

[ebiggs1]

"...200 less than the new refurb....should I consider the older model?"

I would prefer the newer model but the older one has worked for many years for more people than any other "L" lens.  It is the "L" that many folks start with and has been for years.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"...why would something so new already be in the refurb store?"

Really not a concern as it has the full Canon warranty.  Since it is tested and inspected, again, by a human, some say they are better.

---

I’m just surprised that they would have enough stock to sell it in the refurb store.  I think having a human inspection of used gear is the only way to go.  Sure, they may use a test jig, but it is better than “eyeballing” it.  “No scratches, it passes.”

[RobertTheFat]

---

ebiggs1 wrote:

You will love the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens.  It will show you a little more tele and a little less WA.  I used the first version of that lens on a pair of 7D's for years at great success.

---

Sorry, Ernie; I disagree. I bought that lens when I bought my second 7D, but only because I was dreaming of going full-frame. It's an excellent lens, but I used it only sporadically. The 17-55 is the right walking-around lens for an APS-C camera, and the 24-105 isn't long enough to make a significant difference.

The 24-105 is now my outdoor walker on my 5D3. I gave the 7D to my daughter this past weekend.

[ebiggs1]

Sshhhh...don't tell all those folks that bought my wedding packages!   

[cas1963 · Accepted solution]

I really like my 17-55, I plan on keeping it, but often I would like more reach, and I am not ready to spend a ton of money so I thought the new 24-105 would be of good quality for an affordable price. I like the idea of having a fixed aperture, and I’m not ready to spend the kind of money a 70-200 f/2.8 would cost me. That’s for the future when I am retired in 5 yrs and have more time to focus on photography than I have right now.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@cas1963 wrote:

I really like my 17-55, I plan on keeping it, but often I would like more reach, and I am not ready to spend a ton of money so I thought the new 24-105 would be of good quality for an affordable price. I like the idea of having a fixed aperture, and I’m not ready to spend the kind of money a 70-200 f/2.8 would cost me. That’s for the future when I am retired in 5 yrs and have more time to focus on photography than I have right now.

---

If the extra 50mm of reach is important to you, you'll find the 24-105 to be an excellent lens.

[TTMartin]

Someone, bought it tried it one day and returned, it so it is no longer 'new'.