[nattairoo]

Hi there



I have either the choice to go with the following purchases

Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 & Canon 24-70mm or Canon 17-40mm & Canon 24-105mm.



I presently own a Canon EOS 7D and old but still in good nic Canon 1D. Which i dont use but maybe one day i may consider going full frame but i have. I have no plans to go full frame for awhile as very happy with the 7D performance for what i do.



I primarily do rural photography work which includes landscapes and domestic animals portraits and some real estate out in open paddocks where conditions can vary from dusty and hot climates to cold icy, rain and frost on the ground during the winter when out in the field.



I am just wondering in peoples opinion what would be the best combination out of the above to give me for picture quality and value for money.



I do alot of rural landscapes both in low light on first light during the mornings and on sunsets. I would like to also do alot more night landscapes or portraits when we often get full moon over the paddocks which gives off good effects with old old rustic buildings and corals etc in the direct path of the light from the full moon. Which would be the better lens the Canon 17-40mm or the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8? overall for these uses



Also working with cattle, horses and dogs etc sometimes there not the most agreeable so this why also considered the extra zoom length of the 24-105mm in the event i cant get in too close but would i be giving away much in picture quality from the 24-70mm if i went the 24-105mm?.



any advice would be appreciated, many thanks