I've had one for over 2 years. On such a wide angle the HSM isn't really an issue, but lack of FTM is if you're into that sort of thing. (Not sure what use FTM is in a wide-angle context with the standard EOS3 screen.) HSM makes a slight noise.
I've been very satisfied with mine and slides taken with it at f5.6 to f11 stand comparison with others taken with my L lenses, EF 35 f2, 28-135 IS USM etc. (I rarely use any lenses except my 300 f4 L wide open.) Flare wise it's no worse than my EF 28 f2.8 used with Canon's lens hood. When showing slides it's those taken at 17mm that get the "Oohs" or whatever. The body covering is slightly soft and after carrying it in contact with a harder surface lens, mine showed a slight indentation which disappeared after a short time. 82mm filters are expensive. I don't have the equivalent Canon to compare with. Since the Canon16-35 went on sale it's interesting to note that the earlier Canon 17-35 is no longer seen as perfection in optics! Malcolm Milton Keynes, UK ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary A. Thurlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 4:51 PM Subject: EOS Sigma 17-35 HSM > For some reason, I have not received any messages fro the list for over a > week. I posted this message and never saw it posted and, of course, saw no > responses. So please - I'd like to have your input. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------- > > I find that my normal wide angle of 28-105mm (Canon USM) is no longer wide > enough when connected to my D30. I would love to get the newest Canon wide > angle zoom, but I don't have the admission price. Absent someone giving me > one, I am, for the first time, considering non-Canon glass. > snip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
