make a wide-zoom that is superior to the 16-35 and 17-40Ls, but mount it only on consumer grade bodies, thus cannibalising both L glass sales and pro-body sales?
Not really. Full frame is still full-frame. I doubt that anyone spending 3,000-8,000 dollars on a pro body would suddenly buy a 1.6x camera instead, just so they could save a couple hundred bucks on the lens. Actually, now that I'm typing that idea out, it seems even more ridiculous.
What they might cannibalize is the excellent Sigma 18-50/2.8. This lens is faster than the 17-40, and lighter to boot (because it doesn't have a wastefully large FF image circle).
Image stabilization on a fast 17-55 lens makes no sense though.
coffeeshakes wrote:
That's silly, have you ever used a short focal length IS lens? Fantastic. A fast one would be even better.
Totally agree with coffeshakes. The assumption that fast lenses are only used wide open flies in the face of actual use. I can think of many situations where I would want to shoot at F16 for DOF but the resulting slow shutter speed mandates either a tripod or IS. Being able to open the lens up to keep the shutter speed up to stop action on the same lens would be a marvelous plus. Just look at how many people are wishing that the new 24-105 F4 IS were a 2.8.
The discussion on that site involves a site admin asserting that he's got inside information on this lens and everybody else saying "Good enough for me." Maybe he's got some credentials we don't know of, but it seems pretty speculative.
