>> |
Rawr
!pBDDkuoH3.
>>61014
Expensive, large, heavy, and I've found the image quality to be not as great as the price tag (or rave reviews) would make you think. I really can't rave about it like I could the 70-200, which *is* worth the money it cost (which is 2x the 17-40). The lens is also pretty long in the tooth.
I'd look at some of the Sigmas and such. They'll get you 90% there, for half the price. Buy from somewhere that'll let you return it, and buy right before you have a good oppertunity to go play with it.
|