enzoferrari650 Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
p.2 #1 · 17-40 f4L to replace kit lens | |
Well, I have actually gone with the 17-40. I bought one off the forums (should be getting it tomorrow).
Dfresh: I have one slight difference, I am not replacing both the kit lens and tamron with the 17-40 L. I am replacing only the kit lens with the 17-40L so I will have both 17-40 and the tamron 28-75. Use the tamron when I am indoors, use the canon when I am outdoors, or when I need wider than 28 indoors (very rare, only for ocassional group shots).
jackkrash: I don't really want to buy an L lens that overlaps what I have already without replacing it. 200 L would not replace my Sigma 70-200 2.8 because I rarely go all the way to 200. I find the Sigma sharp enough for my purposes, so as long as it is sharp to me, I have no reason to replace that. (I shouldn't say that because I've been thinking about upgrading to 70-200 L IS in the future).
Patrick: Very true about the 17-40 lasting longer than my body. And when I do upgrade to full frame, I doubt I'd have a problem with the 17-40 ever being not wide enough. I have never found my kit lens to be not wide enough for any of my shooting, but then again, I am just a newbie without the experience.
smaniscalco: I simply dont have more than 600 to spare. If I were to go that route, I woud probly just get the Tokina 12-24 with less of a gap. I do hear great things about the canon 10-22 though.
|