[taxboy]

I know another of these threads I'm looking for input on what to buy. My current lineup is :

EOS 40D, Canon 28-105, Tamron 90mm Macro, Canon 70-200L f4 Sigma 400 5.6

Main subjects are Garden / plant photography, wildlife & l'm starting to get into landscapes / buildings. Having recently bought the L lens & been blown away by its quality, it got me thinking about replacing the 28-105 for something a bit better. Unfortunately the old wallet won't run to another L so my research has led me to either the Tamron 28-75 2.8 or the 17-50 2.8, which will have to be bought S/hand. I understand these seem to be best value for money although there can be sample variation

I'm currently undecided which to go for:

The 28-75 seems appealing as it is the closest in range to what I'm currently using and could still be a walkaround lens .... but on occasion I have found I could do with something a little wider. If I went for this then I suppose I can always save for something like a Tokina 12-24 in a few months time (more expense )

The 17-50 gives me the wider view but may be a little short for a walkaround and means I would possibly have to carry the 70-200 to give me a wider coverage. However I probably wouldn't then need an UWA as there would be too much overlap

So can anyone rationalise my thought process please.

As you can tell I'm in a dilemma from the length of my ramble

[Martin.D]

You have the Canon 28-105 wich covers a good range, for Ultra Wide angle why not the 10-20mm ?

Just a thought...

[taxboy]

Originally Posted by Martin.D

You have the Canon 28-105 wich covers a good range, for Ultra Wide angle why not the 10-20mm ?

Just a thought...

Thanks for that - I'm not really that happy with the image quality of the 28-105 and on occasion would like the creativity that a wide aperture could bring

[Pirate!!]

Have you considered buying an adapter and investing in a manual M42 lens? Surely you can get quality M42 mount lenses for peanuts?