Robbins isn't the infallible text that people make it out to be. Its very thorough and is a great resource, but its not an ideal way for a lot of 2nd year med students to learn from, including me. I don't have the attention span to read the seemingly endless text of big Robbins. Even if I did, I still find it to be a low-yield way to learn pathology, mainly since the time I spent reading Robbins was time I could have been using multiple high-yield resources that cover the basics more succinctly. However, some people swear by big Robbins, so I'd suggest seeing if you can stomach reading those long chapters.
I'm a big fan of the "baby" Robbins, the pocket companion, for class work if not step 1.
Sections are shorter than Rapid Review and more succinct. After I've been reading Goljan all block, its a nice change of pace to review the baby before a test. You can find used copies of the older edition at a price cheaper than fast food.
IMO Robbins is a text for 1st/2nd year studying. When you're interested in learning things in depth. To do well on Step1 you really don't need to know the intricate signalling pathways and what not in that detail. Really low yield for Step1. You can get a 250+ by knowing the high yield stuff really well.
If I read Robbins at all I would read only the first couple of chapters (as someone else suggested) on basic 1st year pathology that underlines all of the organ system basics.
well from someone who just started.. I can say this.. read alteast first 3 chapters of Robbins... after that, if your foundations are strong.. stick with RR or BRS .. otherwise.. someone like me with weak foudnations.. do Robbins..