A 16-40 f/4L would be fine for me (even better, f/3.5).
At this range, IS would be nice, but I could live w/o it if it's going to make the lens bigger. The compact size and price of the 17-40 f/4L is what makes it a great lens on the cost-performance scale; I hope the new one won't overlook this advantage.
If not, I might as well wait for the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8 ED challenger... It should be somewhere down the road (though I'd expect about 2 or 3 more years).
At this range, IS would be nice, but I could live w/o it if it's going to make the lens bigger. The compact size and price of the 17-40 f/4L is what makes it a great lens on the cost-performance scale; I hope the new one won't overlook this advantage.
If not, I might as well wait for the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8 ED challenger... It should be somewhere down the road (though I'd expect about 2 or 3 more years).
Upvote
0