Hi Carla, On Wed, October 5, 2005 2:02, Cjr said: > I am considering adding a wide angle lens to my modest > collection, primarily for use with the D60--I think > the reasons are obvious, the. 1.6 factor. I have > read through the archives and t:he debate on Canon > vs. Sigma etc. leaves me not much further towards a > decision than when I started.
Well, things to bear in mind are: 1. Compatibility issues (Some aftermarket lenses don't work on newer/future Canon bodies, they might have to be rechipped or replaced) 2. Durability (go to a shop and put an "L" next to a similar performing aftermarket lens) 3. New price and resell value (...) It's a can of worms... > I'm leaning to the 17-40L, If you're willing to spend the money, go for it. You won't be disappointed! I can only compare it with the 16-35L, but others on this list can surely share their experience with the 17-40L. > I'm an amatuer amatuer <ggg>... I tend to like good stuff, > If I can get the great one for $100 more than the OK one, > I'll get the great one. But, if I can get something that > is 90-95% of the top of the line, for 30% less, I might go > for the value lens. I guess a lot of people on the list think like that - if they can spare the money! > Near term will be using it to photo document our complete > rebuild of our house. Good luck with that, you'll propbably need it ;-) > Long term, landscape, nature etc. will be main use. Realise that 17mm on the 1.6 cropping factor makes a relative 27mm on film. Some find this not wide enough for certain landscape shots. Did you consider a prime? Cheers, Stefan * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
