| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/11/2007 12:51:34 AM · #1 |
Okay... so here it is... the single most asked question on photography boards... hehe. Which of the following lenses will compliment my line up, and do I need to spend the extra money? At the moment I've pretty much made my decision, but I want to hear some opinions before I tell you what it is...
I have been out shooting and find myself constantly switching between the 12-24 and 70-200. Both of these lenses I love and would not part with for my life... I'm trying to buy I good quality lens to fill the gap so I hopefully won't be constantly changing lenses. Hence... the following choices:
Tamron 17-50
I have used this lens and it is quite good, fast-ish focus and the pics are sweet, however, I'm a clumsy bugger and feel like if I bump the end and that lens while it's extended that I'll kill it. It's also kind of stiff to zoom.
Nikkor 35mm Prime
A good prime in between the things I've got...
Sigma 30mm
Another badarse prime in the range I'm looking for.
Nikkor 17-35
A sweet lens on all accounts...
Nikkor 17-55
The lens made of dreams...
Okay, there they are... and money is not an issue, which do I buy? |
|
|
|
08/11/2007 02:29:33 AM · #2 |
Being it is the next Lens I will probably purchase, I would say the 17-55 however you are still going to be changing lenses when you want to go futher than 55.
The Primes are nice but unless you want to do alot of walking back and forth to frame up your shots they are not really going to help solve your issue.
Have you thought about the 18-200 VR? it will give you pretty much all the range you have with the other two lenses.
Message edited by author 2007-08-11 02:30:09. |
|
|
|
08/11/2007 11:24:15 AM · #3 |
| Cheers... I have used the 18-200 but I must be the only person in the world not to like that lens... hehe. |
|
|
|
08/11/2007 02:05:35 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by shalrath:
I have been out shooting and find myself constantly switching between the 12-24 and 70-200. Both of these lenses I love and would not part with for my life... I'm trying to buy I good quality lens to fill the gap so I hopefully won't be constantly changing lenses. Hence... the following choices: |
Is there no 24-70 option to actually fill the gap you want to fill? Or is this another benefit of going Nikon? Heheh. |
|
|
|
08/11/2007 09:27:53 PM · #5 |
| I did use a 24-70, Sigma I believe, and kept wanting just a few mm wider every time... I profiled my shots and the most common focal lengths I use in the wide arena are 12 and 16/17... so I thought maybe having the little bit of wide would be good too... |
|
|
|
08/11/2007 09:35:55 PM · #6 |
17-55
and buy another body for your 70-200
One on your left shoulder, and one on your right.
Can't go wrong
Message edited by author 2007-08-11 21:37:29. |
|
|
|
08/11/2007 09:37:10 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by shalrath:
Cheers... I have used the 18-200 but I must be the only person in the world not to like that lens... hehe. |
You're not the only one.. I was not impressed either
I have the 17-35 and it's a MUST HAVE lens IMHO. I prefer it over the 17-55 simply because I do still very seldom shoot film and the 17-55 wont run on a film body.
Had the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 and it was rather nice too, slightly soft until f4 but nothing too serious.
My next lens will be 1 of 2
1. 28-70 f2.8 AFs nikkor
2. 35-70 f2.8 AF nikkor
|
|
|
|
08/11/2007 09:39:55 PM · #8 |
17-55 if you don't plan on upgrading when Nikon finally comes out with a full frame and 17-35 if you do. The 17-35 pretty much never leaves my camera.
:-D |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/30/2025 09:36:31 PM EST.
