EF 20.35mm f3.5/4.5 USM Autofocus

[edmund]

any of you people got one of these, tried one of these, had one of these or have an opinion on one of these?
I'm thinking of getting this one with the 28-135IS.
What do you think?

[stuartf287]

I bought one of these used shortly after I first got the 10D. It seems to be a decent but not great wide-angle option. I think the ratings are generally "average." Since then I have gotten a Sigma 12-24 and now use that for nearly all my wide angle shots.

[EXA1a]

any of you people got one of these, tried one of these, had one of these or have an opinion on one of these?
I'm thinking of getting this one with the 28-135IS.
What do you think?
The 20-35/3.5-4.5 is not an excellent lens. It's light, it's compact and it has average optical quality. The 300D kit lens has better optical quality and I preferred it over the 20-35 until I got the 17-40 from Canon.

--Jens--

[stuartf287]

I'll tell you what would make a great line-up of lenses if you can manage the cost:

Sigma 12-24 F4.5-5.6
Canon 24-70 F2.8L
Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS
Canon 100-400 F4.5-5.6L IS

With only 4 lenses you can cover every focal length from 12mm to 400mm (equivalent to 19mm to 640mm for regular 35mm) with very little overlap. If you stop short of the 100-400L, there is no overlap at all. I'd love to be able to throw in the Tamron 200-400 instead of the Canon L in the interests of efficiency (no duplication of focal lengths at all), but I understand the Tamron lens is not very good. Replace it with a Bigma, and you're covered from 12mm to 500mm (19mm to 800mm) with only 4 lenses. Not bad at all.