At 11:19 PM 4/3/2006, you wrote: >I also want to add the17-40mm f/4L and I am strongly considering the >70-200mm f/2.8L IS. Buying all three is a little expensive so I have >been considering getting just the last two. That leaves a gap from >40mm-70mm. I suspect that I do not shoot much in that range anyway. >What do ya'll think?
I use my 24-105 for 90% of my photography. The main problem you will encounter with17-40 + 70-200 is that you cannot switch easily between wide and medium telephoto. I also have the 16-35 and the 70-200. It really depends on what your need is. The 70-200 is big and certainly not discrete. It attracts attention. Any of those lenses are nice. The IS is really nice. I wished the 70-200 focused about 1 foot closer, or did1:4 magnification instead of 1:5.8. The 24-105 does 1:4.3. I do a lot of nature photography and close focus is an important feature for me. I'm bumping into it a lot. More info to ponder. WayneS * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
