Thanks for the samples, Dave. I think those are quite convincing.


John: I read your link, and I think it makes a very solid point on the ultra-wide angles being sensitive to composition. That's my own experience as well using the 11-16mm - the lines in the picture change a lot with every mm down there. Since you can't quite rearrange the scene in landscapes, that could be a good argument for getting a zoom to cover the wide-angle end of the spectrum at least. On the other hand, I've often ended up in quite desolate places with next to no light polution, which would be ideal for a few night-landscapes of the milky-way. As I can turn the ISO up a fair bit higher than I could with the 50D, do you think it would be possible to take those nightshots with the 16-35 or 17-40 without getting startrails?

As to my general shooting style, I'd say 50-60% landscapes, 50-40% people, and maybe 5% wildlife (tele-kinda-stuff). Well that doesnt quite add up to 100%, but I hope it gives some indication anyway

By the way, only your first shot of the dog seems to be showing up on my screen (the other links lead to a blank page). I think it's a good point about the wiggle-room for bokeh though. Of course it takes a bit of planning to arrange the background on unsuspecting people, but that can be overcome.

Edit: Your linked photos seem to work fine now. For some reason those things always only work after mentioning them