*February 05, 2012, 10:57:23 AM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 05, 2012, 10:57:23 AM

Login with username, password and session length
8308 Posts in 1500 Topics by 1779 Members - Latest Member: fbea
There are some photographers who are just pressing a button. And then there are the others who see the world in a very different way...
Search:     Advanced search
Photography Thailand Forum
* Home Help Search Gallery Login Register
Recent Pictures

Views: 13
Comments (0)
By: Marc Schultz

Views: 16
Comments (0)
By: Marc Schultz

Views: 35
Comments (0)
By: Ray Evans

Views: 25
Comments (0)
By: Ray Evans
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Send this topic Print
Author Topic: 16-35 2.8L Is it worth it for 1.6x cameras?  (Read 577 times)
Josh White
Baby Kahuna
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 6
« on: April 27, 2006, 11:51:08 PM »
Contemplating buying a 16-35 L lens as a replacement/everyday lens for my 300D. A friend suggested that a 24-70 might be a better option first and maybe a EF-S 10-22. The thing is I don't want to buy dig only lenses as I'd like to upgrade to a 5D sometime in the next couple of years. Anyone got any suggestions? Huh

Thanks
Josh

http://www.pbase.com/josh_white
Logged
Thomas_R
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2006, 08:35:07 PM »
Dear Josh,
The range of 16-35 would be a nice lens even for 1.6x  if you are willing to spend that big amount of money.
But why not give the Tamron 17-35 a try. This is a great lens for its price and very sharp on 17mm almost wide open.
I use this lens on my EOS 20D as well an an EOS 30 Film Body and I'm absolut happy with this lens.

Great Value.
Sorry for my bad english :-)

Thomas
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Send this topic Print
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines
Themis design by Bloc 		Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!