Quote Originally Posted by BES
I would like to go to FF sometime soon-ish, perhaps in a year, most-- two

I commend you for planning ahead, that's very wise. In this case, I would advise you to get the 10-22. The 16-35 on your 40D just isn't "ultra" wide: it's only "wide". When you do upgrade to full frame, you'll lose 20% or so from selling the 10-22 (unless you keep a 1.6X camera as a 2nd body as many do), but in the mean time you'll have several years of true ultra wide photography, which is a whole different world.


Furthermore, the 16-35 costs $1,400, but the optical quality is no better than the $450 Tamron 17-50 f/2.8: you would be paying an extra grand for a feature that you can't even use for 1-2 years (full frame compatibility), plus some other bonus features such as the full time manual, weather sealing, manual focus features, etc. By the time you finally get a full frame camera, you may have decided that you prefer a *different* ultrawide lens for full frame, such as a new EF 12-24 f/2.8 (if Canon ever tries to make one to match Nikon's) or the much lighter 17-40 f/4.