>> |
Anonymous
>Um Canons primes arent too digital friendly (except for anything below 28mm)
I've never heard anyone bitching about any current production lens dropping in quality on digital.
>all their constant f/4 lenses are expensive L glass.
Compare the cost of the 17-40L and the 16-35L. If you're saying, "let's have lots of lenses and lots of different price points," then there's a perfect model of your approach. B&H reads $669.95 for the 17-40, $1,359.95 for the original 16-35, and $1,424.95 for the II version.
>Looks what Nikon has:
Yeah, which is fucking redundant. At most a system needs three standard zooms: a kit, a midgrade, and a professional one. And you really can drop the midgrade, kit lenses aren't unusable and it's possible for most people who can save up for a DSLR to save up $1,000 over time.
|