Richard,
I use the 17-35 as one of my main two lenses. The zoom is great and I
find myself using the 17mm often (I hear(say) its closer to 18 mm in
practice). I can't compare it to the Sigma, having never used one. The
Canon is prone to flare when shooting into or near a bright light source and
does distort lines when at the widest zoom. At times, I have found the
distortion to be noticeable even without straight lines at the extreme ends
of the frame (such a people's faces). If these aspects will be a problem,
then go with a 20 mm prime (or $14mm).
If budget is a real concern, go with a lower priced lens. However, if you
go with the Canon lens, the resale value will hold at about 70% of new.
Expect the resale on a Sigma to be only about 1/3 of new price (I've seen it
on ebay). So, after using each lens for a few years and then selling it,
the price will be about the same. Hence, you can use the Canon lens for
those years at no increased cost! (My observation).
Dave B.
Richard Corbett wrote:
> I have a yen to own a Canon 17-35mm L lens, however I believe
> that the price
> is greater than a yen, actually it's about �1,100 sterling over here.
>
> Anyone using this objective may care to offer an opinion, and in
> addition it
> may be possible for someone to comment on the Sigma equivalent
> which is the merest fraction of the cost of a Canon....
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
