I have one, it works well for me considering the price ($450 here on B&S). 2.8 isn't perfect, but pretty darn usable, and since I bought it for events, the photos are never blown up more than 8X10 more often 5X7 so the sharpness is quite fine at these enlargement sizes. I also find the focal length nice for sunsets and landscape (and I don't see the flare that others complain about shooting right into the sun), too, and by 5.6 this is a nice sharp lens. I find the 50 1.8 just too long on a 20D for events, the 20-35 is just perfect for this.
I used to have one. It was pretty good. Focusing is a bit slow and it is not as sharp as the newer wideangle-zooms. For the price it is a good lens IMO.
Just bought one of these last week. Very impressed so far. I didn't consider this wide enough with a 1.6 crop but for a 5D it's perfect. Mine is very sharp even at f/2.8. AF is reasonable but with more noise than USM.
i had actually bought one to test and thought it was great, i couldnt afford to keep it and opted for a 24mm f2.8 and a 35mm f2 which i got used. for me that was all i really needed.
Good lens. I used it at my first newspaper job and probably have hundreds of images published using it. This lens was actually sharper wide open than the 17-35L that followed it.
Great lens for the price.
Russ
I refuse to use adorama after they lied to me about some stuff. Just canceled an order I had made with them after they lied to me on the phone and ordered from B and H. They would have shipped at the same time, but it is the principle of it.
I've been shooting with the 20-35L since about February 2005 and it is a fine wide angle lens for the money. Its a sharp lens and quite a value if you need the fast F2.8 aperture.
