bill_morrow1

A little side note. Twice the speed; twice the weight. 27 oz for the 4 (IS); 56 oz for the 2.8 same.

My 40D takes wonderful pictures with the f4. I believe I read it has a newer generation IS. The 2.8 is a little too weighty for me, I'm afraid.

Be glad you don't have a 5D. I don't know if the larger area of the sensor--or more specifically the low pass filter which covers the sensor--and the static charge of that filter (which is plastic) is the reason,

but what a junk magnet. Again, probably because of the increased sensor size, but that thing really shows the dirt. I don't even think about changing a lens outside anymore. I will say though that my 40D

has not exhibited this problem. The 20D did; not so noticeably as the 5D though.

At a trade show in Las Vegas (CES) I spoke with a Canon rep about your very question. His recommendation: 17-40. Now this was pre Version 2 of the 16-35, but he said roughly that if both were the same price (which obviously they're not)....he would still chose the 17-40 for the superior quality. A couple of other reps verbally agreed. I really like mine, even if things do look a little odd down at 17 on the 5D. For what it's worth.

DBL Distributing, Phoenix. Ultralast. EVERY BIT as good as Canon,

and I think about $10.00 or less (I'd have to look).

I took the BG off the 20 and put it on the 40 and it's been working flawlessly. I can't recall the specifics but there is a part I think, that is stored when the BG is used. It's one of those things you pretty much do once and forget what you did. The short answer is--no problem.

Living in Flagstaff I was about to toss in some ideas, but the previous posts said about everything I could and then some. I will add this.

Be aware of the weather. Several deaths occurred a couple of years ago from a flash flood. Avoid the "monsoon" season--usually after July 4th. Also Lake Powell and Glen Canyon Dam are interesting subjects.

If you take the dam tour, tripod, flash and polarizer. They have bulletproof glass now between viewing areas and generators. Flash obviously won't work, but the polarizer can null out the glare of the glass. Enjoy.

My goodness; that was more of a response than I would have imagined.

Resellerratings.com was the one I wanted. Thanks Yakim and

everone else.

Maybe somebody can help. I've seen this before, and thought I saved it but

apparently not. It is a rating, I guess you would say, or various dealers of photo

equipment. I wanted to send to a friend. If anyone can recall....I thank you in

advance.

Canon rep at the CES show in LV suggested I would be happier with the

17-40 over the 16-35, firstly because he and everyone he knew thought it was a sharper lens, and of course it is less costly. I'm not sure of this, but I think there was a second version introduced after that conversation. If so, it might be a different story. I have the 17-40, and it's done everything I've ever needed.

I have both essentially. Meaning that I have the 18-250 which I like a lot as a walkaround, and the 75-300 IS (not the 70-300). I have and use L

series whenever I have something of importance that I can plan for in advance. I find the IS essential, but only over 100. Below that, I'm sure

its valuable, but I'm not sure how much. What is valuable I think is the ability to drop below 28mm with a crop camera, and for walkaround I find myself doing that a lot. What I absolutely want to avoid is changing lenses in the field unless totally unavoidable. Then I'll go back to the clean room (my car) to do it. I've had just too many instances where some junk got in there during the change and I didn't see it until later.

Short answer: Tamron is very good, but no IS. I would like that above 100, but I'm not willing to give up the 18-28 to get it--especially when I've got other lenses.

Have both. Really like the 10-22 on the 40D better than the 17-40, which

does get used obviously on the 5D. I personally think you would not be

unhappy with the 10-22/40D combo

Thank you Dan. My best guess was Universal Walk-Around

OK...I'm dumb. What is UWA. Really....I don't know

Tamron 18-250. No it's not an L Series, and I'm not saying it is--but for

"everyday/general/walkaround" shots, it ain't bad. Quality is good, and when you want that shot...NOW....it does the job, and I think rather well.

Vacations come to mind quickly, especially if you're flying.

Like Matt, I didn't try this on my 5D, nor my 20D (used the 40D). Wasn''t

using the ST-E2 either. I had done a site check before, then changed horses in the middle, so to speak...and wound up using the 580. I thought it was just me...but maybe not totally...

Interesting. This past weekend, I did a shoot under a tent--white somewhat--bouncing as you have described. I did the initial test with a

550, but later noticed the output from the 580--which I used just because it's faster to set the HS sync--was less. I actually wondered myself if the output was different. Been meaning to ck the specs for GN

but haven't had the time yet. I'll be interested in the response to this question as well. Bill

Speaking as one who HAS damaged a low pass filter--the thing you're actually cleaning--I recommend that whichever cleaner you select, that

you do not get carried away with applying excessive pressure to the cleaning swab. It's plastic, and it will scratch, and you WILL see it. A viewing device of some type is very helpful. A couple on the market. You really can't clean what you can't see. Another quick note. Junk is far more visible on FF sensors than cropped. I surely hope that any new 5D units have some type of sensor cleaning gimmick.

Some here say they don't really do anything. I have found far less problems with my 40D than the 20D. Maybe their cleaning deal, or maybe now I'm just a little more careful. It can be a frustrating.

Caps and filters. MOST fit...however it seems that POLARIZERS, Canon for instance as well as the ultra thin Hoya DO NOT accept the PLASTIC

caps that come with the lens. I even called Canon once. They had no answer. There are however rubber type slip-OVER caps--as contrasted to the squeeze-clip OEM type that fit into the outer threads of the

UV for instance. Short answer is there seem to be no outer threads on polarizers (not UV's) to accept the OEM cap. Not great if you're walking around looking for something to shoot and have the polarizer in place. No front end protection. Maybe someone has a good reason for this, but I haven't figured it out yet.

18-250 LD DI11 Tamron was a recent purchase for just such applications, e.g. walkaround. The problem has always been any one lens fails to fill the desirable portion of the quick-pic spectrum one might wish to have for vacation, etc. 24 (1.6 x) is of course 38

which isn't all that wide. High end of most lenses fine, but those wide shots are hard to get without changing a lens someplace you would rather not be doing so. I have several L lenses; but for vacation etc, I really do like this one. If you know what you're going after before you leave, grab an L. If not, give this a thought.

Can't confirm this, but "I've been told"...that Toshiba actually

makes the cards for Sandisk. Whether true or not, I have a Toshiba and it works flawlessly (just in case you run across them somewhere,

like Sam's Club for instance)

I have to second everything stated by everyone who responded. It really does give you more holding power, especially with something like a 100-400. Personally I like the older style grip--the one I transferred over from my 20D. I'm not sure the pocket-full of AA cells works for me personally. And nothing is more aggravating than

having a battery go flat; even if there is one back in the car somewhere.

Same lens; same problem. Have not however, tried it on the 40D. And hey while I'm experimenting, maybe I toss it onto the 5D and see what fails also. I did discover this early on though. Setting to Aperture priority would read the 5.6 only, but not go into failure mode. This is perhaps what Mark was describing. Any other mode is a

no-go/Error 99. Beyond all that, the images are very good.

Pixel DENSITY isn't something I thought about. But just the descrption makes it a little clearer in my mind. The part Bob brought up about the 40D/crop and 5D/no-crop, also helpful.

I had to use the 5D in this case because the 40D pulled in too close

with no zoom-room. I should have realized--but didn't--that the 400 end would not be the optimum. That IS something I'm going to keep in mind next time out. Thanks..