This weekend Neil is out of town sightseeing. Being the delightfully wonderful girlfriend that I am, I loaned him my EF 17-40 f/4 L USM:
I figured he might like to play with it for some good architectural shots of the city he is visiting.
To console myself for not getting to go on this adventure weekend, I am going to go do some comparison shopping for a longer lens. I have pretty much already made up my mind which lens I am going to buy, but just to be sure I am going to go play with them both. The contest is between the Canon EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 IS USM which has image stabilization that would be nice for the longer shots, but so far all the sample photos I have seen from this lens are fairly soft when it comes to focus. I love crystal clear, severe images. I want them to pop. So along side this one, I will be looking at (and probably purchasing) the EF 70-200 f/4 L USM. No IS on this lens, but for the same price I get better construction and optics, meaning clearer images (assuming no user error of course!)
Besides, I like the grey/black style of the L lenses. I did get to play with the first one at the Photo WILD! event and personally found that I wasn't that thrilled with the shots that did turn out. They are soft, but when I look at them, they are in focus…they just don't have that "pop" value (even with some post processing touch-ups). And ultimately, my goal with photography is to need very little post processing unless I am going for some special effects or something dramatic (like moving to a b/w photo or sepia). So anyway, whichever I do finally decide upon will finish off my set for now – until I can afford something like the 100-400 or larger – but that is a ways down the road. After this my budget re-focuses on landscaping and wedding stuff.