lens gap

[zmikers]

I am planning on purchasing the canon 17-40 f/4L USM and the canon 70-200 F/4L USM lenses. I already have the Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Lens. Here's my question, would you keep the 28-105 to fill the gap of the other two lenses or are there any other suggestions of lenses to fill the 40-70 gap?

[cdifoto]

I'd fill it with a 50 or 60mm prime (macro or non, your choice). It's not a void that I'd particularly miss. By the time you changed lenses you coulda just stepped a few feet forward or back.

[timmciglobal]

A good choice might be the 60 EF-S macro. It's not that great for low light (only F2.8) but it's a steller performer sharp as all heck (too sharp sometimes) and does 1:1 macro and has USM/decent build.

Tim

[coldrain]

I agree with cdi and tim. The 17-40 70-200 gap is not a very big problem. I myself did not find a problem with my 18-50 and my 70-200, when I felt I wanted to go more tele than 50mm it would always be a lot more, and when I felt I needed to go wider than 70mm it again would be a lot more than just to 55mm or so.

So... you probably do not really need a lens in between. Your own suggestion, the 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 USM II, may be a nice option anyway, just a zoom for other occasions. It is very cheap yet delivers some very good results for the price.

And the 60mm f2.8 macro would be a very nice macro and portrait lens. A 50mm f1.8 would be a very nice low light lens, and can also be used as short-ish portrait lens.

[zmikers]

coldie, cdi and timm, I really appreciate the comments. I think you are all spot on when you say that the gap isn't really a big deal. Maybe the 60mm macro is a good option, more for the macro option rather than filling the gap. Cheers for the thoughts.