What's your opinion on the Canon 20-35mm f/2.8 L on a Canon 7D Mark II (1.6 crop sensor)?
I was debating between the 35mm and 50mm but thinking the 20-35 on a 1.6 sensor will cover both focal length.
The lens will mainly be used for group photos, everyday thing, and taking pictures at events such as gathering, vacations to the beach, amusement park, aquariums, zoo, etc.
My other lens is the 70-200mm 2.8 IS and mainly used for sports.
Anonymous
You will have a bit of a gap in your "armoury" between 35mm and 70mm - a lens of around 50mm is really useful for portraits on a crop-frame of 1.6 ratio. There is almost certainly a lens in the Canon stable which is 17mm to 55mm (or to 50mm?) at f2.8, which will give you what you want and a better chance of portraits at 55mm and a somewhat wider facility at 17mm if the big group is in a small room. That lens is specifically designed for crop-frame for the sort of applications you want.
I have a feeling that the 20 to 35mm is aimed at full-frame bodies, where it would supply almost all wide-angle needs for many people using full-frame (but would not be really a "standard zoom".)
keerok
The good things I see with the 20-35mm f/2.8 L are the bigger aperture size on the 35mm end and more importantly, better optics. Otherwise, the 18-55mm kit lens would be more useful especially with portraits. If you are after faster shutter speeds, get those two prime lenses instead.
?
I owned this lens when I shot film. It was a pretty good lens, but not as sharp as Canon's standard and telephoto f/2.8 L zoom lenses. The newer lenses from Tamron or Sigma with newer lens designs could possibly be better. While photozone.de doesn't have a review of the 20-35 L, they do have a lot of others all with sharpness charts - http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff
Emma
I have one and I love it. I really like the a7s though too its SO much lighter rand easy to carry