Yeah, I know. This topic's been covered ad nauseum. But before you you folks break out the torches to run the monster out of the village, please hear me out. I've got the Beast and the Beauty (70-200), but I need a bit of help choosing a wider-angle lens. I've thought about completing the "Trinity" by purchasing the 17-35 - but on the other hand, I've thought about going with the 17-55. I'd love to sit here and tell you that my shooting consists mainly of _______. But the fact of the matter is that I shoot everything I need/want to shoot. I have no true set pattern of shooting. I just want something a bit wider. I thought about the 12-24 (which I'm sure I'll eventually pick up - thanks Dave Dickerson:biggrin, but I really want to have the ability to shoot in low-light situations. So, here's my dilemma: should I pick up the -35 or the -55? I realize that there are certain "camps" on the Cafe that prefer one to the other - usually because they own one or the other. Very few people will admit that they would rather own a different lens - unless they own slower glass and wish they had faster. It's human nature to favor what you have (and if you don't believe that, go watch a Little League game coached by parents). With that being said, I would like your opinions on what would make more sense for me. So...does anyone have experience with both lenses? And if so, how do/did they compare in the 17-28mm focal lengths? Any help would be VERY much appreciated.