[Grumpy John]

My Sigma Lenses are - 10mm f2.8 Fisheye, 8-16 f4.5-5.6 UWA, 30mm f1,8 prime, 17-70 f2.8-4, 70-200 f2.8 with 2x tele-converter. The photo's of Xavier Rudd I put up were shot with the 70-200.
I'm looking at purchasing the 24-105 f4 as a walkaround lens to use in conjunction with the 8-16. I've been using the 17-70 and love it, but it can be a bit "short" sometimes and the 70-200 is too heavy to lug around the city when I'm doing streetscapes.
Sorry if this is hijacking your thread, we can discuss elswhere if you like.

[loose cannon]

Hijack away John, we're pretty casual around here We have moderators here but they're usually in the back room drinking the profits

The 24-105 sounds like a good length lens and it would give you good coverage. I'd like to replace my 17-55 with something with a bit more IQ. It is a good lens but fails in poor light at times.

[Ironwood]

IQ= Image Quality.
I bought a 24-85 lens in anticipation of going to a FF sensor. The FF didn't eventuate, so I used it on my crop sensor camera, but didn't like it for a walkaround lens because I was used to having 18mm at the short end, I really missed that wider end of the zoom. Ended up selling it and buying a 16-85.

Handing out the keys to the Photoholics corporate liqueur cabinet to all moderators does have its hazards

[Grumpy John]

Image Quality duuuuhhh I should have known. In that case the Sigma 17-70 fits right in.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sig...-f2-8-4-os-hsm

[seaslug]

Don't worry, I get a bit lost in the acronyms too!