justruss Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Yeah, there are no problems with the 17-55 IS. When it came out it was the envy of many FF, f/2.8, L-glass toting shooters.
BTW, the whole L thing is primarily a marketing ploy... that works remarkably well. It's a classic pseudo-professional label aimed at advanced amateurs who are into gear. The highest end pros I know don't distinguish between L and non-L glass.... they pick lenses based on focal length, aperture, and getting over some image quality and/or build threshold for the intended job. In the focal lengths were there's a choice between L and non-L primes, I've seen about 50% of their glass being non-L primes. This is among people for whom their 5D3/D800/1DX is their low end body, by the way.
I wouldn't get caught up in the labels. From all that I've seen and experienced, for instance, the 17-55 IS crushes the 24-105L.
|