Hi All,


Right now I'm trying to cover the wideangle to tele part of my kit. I know I may be trying to kill too many birds with one stone, but I don't have the cash to buy an L prime for every focal length.I've come up with a couple of options; all help is very much appreciated. Feel free to suggest other possibilities not listed below. Total budget = $2500.


1. EF 24-105 + 70-200 f/4L IS. Cost - $2100. I like this combo but the 38mm wideangle is a problem and a constant f/4 aperture all around would require the purchase of an 85 f/1.8.


2. EF 16-35 +70-200 f/4L IS. Cost - $2500. Is it realistic to use a 16-35 as a general purpose lens?


3. EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM. Cost - $2500. I would have to rent a general purpose lens, but I feel w/ the 2.8 aperture I could shoot faster sports, indoor events and portraits, etc.


I could think of endless other possibilities, but I'll say I'm looking to shoot landscapes, portraits indoors and out, and would like to have some tele reach to complement my 300 f/4. Is there purpose in having a 70-200 f/4 to complement a 300 f/4 and 24-105? I don't want to buy a lens and never use it.


Thanks to all for all your help. It's nice to have some (much, much) smarter people around here to help.


brendan