[Zig]

...I know, I know; these threads are reading like a transparent catalogue of Zig's impetuosity, but since I got the 16-35 I've got, well, "greedy"really, at the expense of sense and even of feeding myself properly. I saw a used-but-mint Canon 70-210mm f2.8L(non-IS) going for not much more than a new 200mm f2.8L and after a moment of hand-wringing, ordered it.
I swore blind that I'd never, ever, go down the route of zooms as opposed to primes as a long-term thang, and I feel a bit of a tart who can't say no, but hey, you know how it is... I gather I can take some comfort in that it doesn't quite weigh as much as my Pentax 300mm for 67, I suppose.

[matthew]

woo-hoo!

I've never heard of that particular beast, but my little 70-200 (equivalent) is my other favourite lens -- probably beating the 7-14 on most days. If you're going to go for zooms, that's a nice set to have.

[Zig]

(this sounds worse matt: I'm actually returning it for a f4 IS instead...)
:|