phil_jeffrey

First: there's a big difference between the new 18-55 IS kit lens and its predecessor kit lens. Avoid the older one like the plague.

The new kit lens is unquestionably the best optical *value* of any lens I've come across. However as you might expect its build quality is about on a par with the 50mm f1.8. Not even close to an L.

The 18-55 IS beats my venerable pro Canon L 20-35mm f2.8 lens, often hands down, at every common focal length and aperture - more so at wider apertures as they're fairly close at f11, more so in the corners than in the middle. At 20mm on the Rebel XTi frame edges at f4 the difference was marked. L lenses are not universally outstanding, especially older designs.

I'm sure the 17-40/4L, 16-35/2.8L (both versions) beat it, but probably less margin than you might expect, and as has been noted with the 17-40/4 it's mostly in terms of color/contrast and not in sharpness. If optical absolutes are what matter, or build, get the L. However you can get very close to L optical performance at a fraction of the price with this 18-55.

Head: buy the Arca B-1 (adequate), the B-1G (probably better) or even

the B-2. I personally use the B-1. Get the Really Right Stuff plates

for the lens. In terms of tripod, it depends on how far you want to

carry the setup and how tall you are. I am 6'2" tall and I currently

use a Gitzo 1320 which is a little wimpy for my 600/4. With the B-1 I

need a center column for "bird in tree" shots but if I were a few

inches shorter I would go for less weight and greater stability in a

tripod w/o a column. For instance, a Gitzo 1325 carbon fibre ($650)

would be tempting though a 1500 series carbon fibre would be better.

If you're not walking far, a 1410 or 1500 might work well for you (and

half the price of a 1548).

<p>

Anyone who has had their 600/4 roll over onto their hand when mounted

on a ball-head will tell you that the Wimberley is very tempting. It

is comparatively large and heavy (3 lbs), not all that cheap, but that

mostly pales into insignificance compared to the cost of a 600/4 IS.

I also suspect the action is much easier for rapid pan (bird in

flight) shots. Or perhaps I'm just a little inept with my Arca B-1 -

a friend of mine has no problems with his 500/4 IS on a B-1.