>> |
Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>144352Also f/4 is really a lot more reasonable than it seems - people get by with the kit lens' f/3.5 (or worse, most of the time), and this is no kit lens. It's worth the loss in light for the insane range and quality.
Agreed. I picked up the lens today, and it's pretty sweet. If I really don't like it in the long run, I can trade it for a 24-70 f/2.8L, but for now I have a 2-stop advantage over that lens due to IS, for static scenes, and 35mm more reach at the long end.
>> Uh, what the fuck? What kind of retard are you trading with?
I didn't mention it yet, but I also gave him $100 to make it a little more even. The 10-22 is much more useful to him than to me, if I'm going to go full frame.
|