David Mitchell wrote:
I'm caught between these two lenses: EF-S 17-55 f2.8, and the EF 24-70
f2.8L.
This is for walk around shooting: travel photos, rock climbing photos
etc. The reviews I've read point to both lenses being fantastic.
I'm shooting on a 20D btw.
My thoughts are:
For the 17-55:
Smaller, lighter, cheaper, wider, IS
For the 24-70:
Best lens hood ever, longer, still a usable wide, especially if I pair
it with 10-22
So I'm interested in what the list thinks. For a feel of the kind of
photos I have been taking recently, check out
http://www.flickr.com/photos/beaumonde
Cheers
David
With the current camera technology increases, the age of the 20D, and
more full frame digicams maybe in the near future I would go with the
24-70 . Pairing with the 10-22 would give you great flexibility.
Now, the 10-22 is an S lens which limits the bodies it can be used on
and at $700 +/- that could be a factor. I don't know what the resale
value would be if you get a full framer and want to sell it.
Another lens that I might add to the conversation is the EF 24-105 f/4 L
IS. Cost is similar to the 24-70 but while it is f/4. it goes out to
105mm and has IS.
I have the older 28-70 f/2.8 L and am considering the 24-105 which is
why I mentioned it.
Bob.
--
/////
( O O )
--------------------oOOO-----O----OOOo-----73 de [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I plan to live forever. So far so good...........
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
