[fisichella]

Have $5000-$6000.Hope to buy a wide angle lens.
1)EF-S 10-22
2)EF-S 17-85 IS
3)EF 17-40L
Or any better choice?

[fycheung]

What is the purpose of the lens?

[fisichella]

Taken landscape and want high quality.(Day and night.)My dslr is 20D

[fisichella]

How many $ EF 100-400F4.5-5.6L IS USM(hong goods)
Or EF 70-200 F2.8L IS USM+2x converter?
Which choice will be have higher quality?I also shooting bird.Thx ^_^
HAPPY SHOOTING EVERYBODY.

[embu31]

有wide要wide！10-22啦！

[Villareal]

sure EF 17-40L , keep it if you might use full frame DSLR in future.
Its rating at http://www.fredmiranda.com is also higher than EFs 10-22

[desiree]

當然梗係17-40L喇
10個有9個都會咁答

但係如果想一支鏡過又想要原廠咁我會揀17-85

[老叟]

唔係越廣越好,廣角得黎要靚至得架!!

[andrewleewc]

Quote"How many $ EF 100-400F4.5-5.6L IS USM(hong goods)
Or EF 70-200 F2.8L IS USM+2x converter?
Which choice will be have higher quality?I also shooting bird.Thx "

EF100-400L = $11700 (hong)...If you shoot bird, please consider EF400 F5.6 = $8,400 (hong)

EF70-200L IS F2.8 = $13300 (hong) + tele 2x (say kenon) $1000 = $14300 (this combo is the worst as zoom len + tele 2x = bad image quality from my personal point of view)

You should consider EF100-400L IS or Non IS EF400 F5.6

Prime len is more sharp than zoom len at 400mm distance...if you shoot bird, you should have long len at least 400 or above...or
you can consider buying EF300 L IS F/4 + 1.4X tele

EF300L IS F/4 around $9600 + kenko tele around $800 = $10,400.

My personal favorite is EF100-400L IS as I can shoot bird without using monopod but the image quality is not as good as EF400L F/5.6 (using tripod or monopod is much at all time if the outdoor lighting condition is not so good)

Hope it helps.

[korea]

If you want to take landscape and high quality photo, sure 17-40.

I bought 17-85 first and sell it, buy 17-40.
17-85 has dark corners at wide angle. Be aware!

[Lientenant]

EF-S 10-22 唔抵, EF16-35啦, 用緊唔錯

http://images3.fotop.net/albums3/Lieutenant/Toys/IMG_9606.jpg

[genewch]

I'd recommend 17-40mm f4L. Very good image quality and good flare suppression. It also keeps an opportunity to use on full size 35mm cameras. The only complaint I get is worsened quality in dim light or indoor environment.

I'm afraid Sigma 12-24mm has blurred loose corners. Canon 16-35mm is too expensive and it doesn't outperform the 17-40mm.

For long tele, I prefer 300mm f4L IS. It's enough for bird pics, I think. It's versatile to add an extender without deteriorating the quality much. Sometimes the 300mm can be suitable to take portraits too. A 400mm would be too long.

[fisichella]

Thx all member^^.I think I will buy 17-40L.
17x1.6=27.2 is enough to use in landscape.
16-35 is very good but very expensive$$$
I'm very difficult to choice which tele lens.
300 F4L IS have a good price and quality but sometime I will take flying bird.Fix zoom range is not easy to capture it.100-400 IS can zoom but not sharp than 300 F4L IS and very heavy.Are Sigma 100-400 OS is a good choice?Anyone was used this?
HAPPY SHOOTING EVERYBODY ^o^

[Villareal]

I haven't got one, but you can have a review of this lens at http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=103&sort=7&cat=37&page=1

It's rating is 9.5 of 10! A high rating!