The BIG question:17-35, 17-55 and so on...

Started Jul 4, 2006 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
rafaelrojas
Regular MemberPosts: 173
Like?
The BIG question:17-35, 17-55 and so on...
Jul 4, 2006

Hi everybody !

For some weeks I have not slept a wink thinking about what to do with my lenses…At the end, I have ruled out some combinations, and my ordeal has been reduced to these options :

1.- 17-55 Nikon 2.8 + 70-200 vr
2.- 17-35 Nikon 2.8 + 24-85 3.5-4.5 Nikon + 70-200 vr
3.- 17-35 Nikon 2.8 + 28-70 2.8 Nikon + 70-200 vr

I like a lot shooting landscapes (so the 17-35 is perfect), only digital (so the 17-55 ?), I dont like if possible being swapping lenses all the time (with option 3 will I be switching them continuously ?) and I already have the 24-85 (well, if I want quality for the rest of my life, I should not think about them in the long term). Another very important thing : I have found a good lens 17-35 second hand for 750 dollars.

-Do you think that I could use the 28-70 as a walk around lens, if the 24-85 has proved to be quite useful to me, or once I have the 17-35 I will end up changing lenses all the time ?

-If I really like landscapes, do you think that the difference between 17-35 and 17-55 is big enough to justify the option ?

-Lets suppose that you have the money, is option 3 justified in terms of cost ?

-Having the 24-85 (so far, the results of this lens have been really good), does your experience tell you that this range is « less used » and it could justify option 2 ?

-Some suggestions ? ? (perhaps other convenient cheaper solutions ?)

Thank you very much for your help….I should decide quickly, or the second hand 17-35 will go away… !

Rafael

ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow