should I save my money and get the 17-85?
or cough up couple more hundred bucks and get 24-70L?
skimmilk68 Member 227 posts Joined Dec 2004 Location: Air Force Academy, CO More info | Sep 25, 2006 13:45 | #1 should I save my money and get the 17-85? -canon 350d
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ledhed Goldmember  1,929 posts Joined Aug 2005 Location: Apsley, On. CAN. More info | Sep 25, 2006 13:49 | #2 save up some money and get the 24-70L Rob - "a photographer is a painter, in a hurry!"
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jon Cream of the Crop  69,628 posts Likes: 227 Joined Jun 2004 Location: Bethesda, MD USA More info | Sep 25, 2006 14:00 | #3 Given what you have now, I'd agree - go for the 24-70. That'll give you fast from 24 mm on up through 210. Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2824 guests, 158 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
