hassan_hodges

I've got the same set up, and haven't noticed anything. Can't say I've thoroughly tested the

two together, but both have used the combination recreationally for 3 months without a

problem.

My 300d has a lot of cosmetic damage and a rattle. it's worked well for the first 10,000

shots. It's going off for repair today though because it might be able to survive bumps and

bangs but it doesn't float. It fell from my tripod after not being properly attached, strait

into about 6 inches of water and sat on the bottom for about 2 seconds. but that was long

enough to thourghly SOAK it. I picked it up and the mirror was repeatedly flipping faster

than I've ever heard it flip before. There was water under every panel, battery, CF, ports,

lens mount. It might be time for a 20D.

I've had a 300D for about a year now. It worked well for the first 10,000 shot. Then it fell

from my tripod and into a river. Needless to say, it didn't float. Two days of sitting in the

sun and won't come on. It's going off to canon today.

I've had a DRebel for about a year now and I got the 17-40/F4 L last week. The 18-55 is a

great for snap shots and pictures where you'll be happy with "good". As I've become more

discriminating with image quality the 18-55 was giving me a lot of shots destined for the

reject pile. The center of the images were generally acceptable, but just got muddy toward

the edges.

The 17-40 is worth the added expense. The images are vastly sharper.