mdougc Loc: Sarver, PA

I have a Canon EFS 18-55mm lens, and I really like the zoom range.  Of 4 lenses, it is my always-attached lens.
 
But I want a lens for higher quality, with zoom capability in that range.  90% of my photos are in the 20-40mm range.
 
So, I have looked at two lenses -
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L
 
But price is the issue.
Does anybody out there suggest a high quality lens that zooms somewhere around 18-55mm???

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

The saying goes, "You get what you pay for".

The Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L series is a good lens.

That said, I have seen some favourable reviews of
Samyang's lens quality, albeit manual focus in most cases.

KateL Loc: Long Island

I have the canon 24-105 ( the first version), it is a wonderful lens. I was able to pick mine up used at Keh.com for a good price

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Look at the 17-55mm F2.8, excellent lens and F2.8 throughout the zoom range.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

24-105, you can get mint off ebay for around $500.00

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

A used 24-105 L could be your best bet and buy from a reputable dealer. Buying refurb or used in good condition will save you money.

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

Love mine.

Haydon

The 17-55 2.8 is the closest EF-s lens to a Canon L Lens.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is excellent ($800 new). Very sharp, fast focusing, well made with both f/2.8 aperture and IS. It is well corrected for distortions and uses UD glass to minimize

If you don't need the f/2.8 aperture and want a little wider range (more versatility?), the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is another superb choice ($800 new). Also quite sharp, fast USM focus, nicely wider than most lenses of this type.

Both these would actually be a better choice than either L-series you mention, in a number of ways. First, they have IS, which the 17-40mm lacks. Next, they both also offer better image quality than either of the L's you mention. And the 17-55mm is a stop faster than either of those L's. The 24-105mm (~$1000) also doesn't go as wide as you say you like to be able to shoot. There's a noticeable difference between 24mm and 20mm! The 15-85mm, OTOH, goes a bit wider than most lenses of this type. And the 17-55mm nearly matches your current "kit" (much lower build and performance quality). Some EF-S lenses might not have quite as good build quality or be as well sealed for dust/moisture resistance as an L-series lens... but higher-end EF-S USM such as these two really aren't very far behind, are pretty well built and reasonably well sealed, may even be better than some L-series.

17-55mm uses 77mm filters and has a 7-blade aperture (curved), 19 elements in 12 groups (two UD and three aspherical). It's IS is rated for 3 stops.
15-85mm uses 72mm filters and has a 7-blade aperture (curved), 17 elements in 12 groups (one UD, three aspherical). IS rated for up to 4 stops.
24-105mm uses 77mm filters and has an 8-blade aperture (curved), 18 elements in 13 groups (one UD, three aspherical). 3-stop rated IS.
24-105mm L II uses 77mm filters, 10-blade aperture (curved), 17 elements in 12 groups (four aspherical). 4-stop rated IS.
17-40mm L uses 77mm filters, 7-blade aperture (curved), 12 elements in 9 groups (one Super UD, three aspherical). No IS.

If there were such a thing as an EF-S "L-series", the17-55mm and 15-85mm would qualify... they both use exotic glass, like L-series must... they both are cutting edge, high performance design, like L-series are expected to be.

However, there's no such thing as an EF-S L-series and never will be. By Canon's own definition, all L-series must be compatible with all Canon EOS cameras past, present and future. Since EF-S lenses are only usable on the AP-C camera models, none of them will ever qualify to get a red stripe painted on them... even if they meet or exceed all other criteria for L-series and even out-perform some L-series. All L-series, by definition, must be "EF" lenses.

If interested in either of these lenses and you want to save a bit, I'd recommend shopping refurbished at the Canon USA website or look for a good, used copy. While you might find used from a private party for a little less, retailers such as KEH, Adorama, B&H typically offer a 90 day warranty on used gear. Private party purchases are typically without any warranty. The refurbs at the Canon website have the same 1-year warranty as new. Note: Stock of refurbished lenses is limited and it comes and goes rapidly at the Canon store. So you might need to be patient and quick to snag one of these lenses there.

mdougc Loc: Sarver, PA

AMFOTO1
Thank you very much. Your comments helped me.
Do you have any thoughts about the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 ?

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Agree. If, as the OP mentioned, that's his preferred focal range then the 17-55 f/2.8 is the appropriate upgrade.

kdogg Loc: Gallipolis Ferry WV

I just got a canon 28-105mm USM II F3.5-4.5 from ebay for $49.00 + $24.00 shipping from Japan. Love the lens! Go to lens for my T5.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Sorry, I have no experience with that Sigma.

The problem with variable aperture standard zooms is that the "big" aperture is at the wrong end of the zoom range... at the wide end where it serves less purpose than if it were at the telephoto end. (Unfortunately, there's no way to design a zoom that does the opposite... it's an optical impossibility.)

Photocraig

I have been shooting with the Sigma 17-70 C for over a year now. It is an excellent lens. It is sharp, fast focusing, and while the 2.8 is at the wide end the f4 gives a nice bokeh at the 70mm end and works well for portraits. And it focuses really close. They call it a Macro--but that's another discussion. I does well enough close up that I don't carry by dedicated true 1:1 Macro lens regularly.

The Optical Stabilization is great and a picture saver of me all around from Studio Workshops to low light and everything in between. I can't recommend it enough. It much less expensive than the similar focal range Canon Zooms which are highly rated.

mdougc Loc: Sarver, PA

Photocraig:
I thank you for your answer. I may be homing in on a purchase.
Do you have any in the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD ??
I don't understand why this is so much cheaper than the 17-70. It has a constant f2.8 max aperture.

Just a note:
Many years ago, I had one bad experience with Sigma.
I bought a Sigma zoom lens for my 35mm Canon. It was excellent.
A few years later, when I upgraded to a new Canon camera, the camera popped up an error when I mounted the Sigma lens.
Sigma said the lens was electronically incompatible with the new camera, and treated me like a stray dog.
So I have been leery of Canon lens competitors since. But I know that Sigma and Tamron get good reviews.

Anyway, what about the Sigma 17-50??