Sell your tammy. It won't work on your new 5d3 anyway
Sell your tammy. It won't work on your new 5d3 anyway
Words get in the way of what I meant to say.
What about the 17-40L???
I love the 135L. It's been off my camera only once since I bought it.
Dave
See my photos:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dthrog00/
I just purchased one during the last round of rebates. Got is for $709. The build quality is great as you would expect from an L. I am very pleased with how sharp it is om my FF and my 1.3x crop. All the talk on the forum is that the 17-55 has better IQ on a 1.6x crop than the 17-40? The f2.8 is good to have but I do not see the need for IS in this range.
Just my thoughts.
Mark
Thanks for the feedback, Mark! I have had a few lenses without IS and for the most part it hasn't bothered me. It's probably gone now but I just saw one on FM for $550 OBO. In Bryan's crops it seems to have some purple fringing going on more than the 17-55mm and the Tammy. Do you have a problem with that?
Denise
I think you have good advice so far.
Money wise though, doesn't the 17-55 look like the better value. I see 135mm all the time on craigslist in that $800 range. Never have seen a 17-55 that cheap.
Well, the 17-55mm I missed out on today was spotless for $740. I should have snagged it right away.
Now that is sharp ...and I'm not talking the lead! The lens doesn't appear to have any issues at all from this shot!
I'm off to scouting prices of 17-40's just to see what's out there before I buy the wireless triggers instead. Still not sure about f4 though, part of the reason why I sold my 24-105mm and bought the primes that I did.