Nikon 24-70 versus 17-55

Started Jan 6, 2008 | Discussions thread
OP Joseph Lab Regular Member • Posts: 197
Re: I'll say it again

Thank you David. Some people do find the split at 24 mm very inconvenient and they have to keep changing lenses. Just about every manufacturer that I know of seems to think that the ideal range for a midrange zoom is 24/28 to 70/85 rather than 35 to 105. It is easier and cheaper to build the latter, so I can only assume that the former range is much more useful for most users. Much of the benefit of a zoom comes from avoiding lens changes. If I am an exception and the popular range is not best for my needs I need to convince myself that I am.

Best wishes


David Grabowski wrote:

For people photography, kids and the like you miost likkely will get
more use from the 24-70. I know i do from the 24-85 D than from the
17-55. THe 17-55 was purchased becasue the 28-70 wasn't wide enough
and the Sigma 15-30 didn't extend enough and there was no 24-70 yet
from Nikon. I used to shoot weddings with the 15-30 and 24-85D combo
because sometimes you are forced against the wall and 24 wasn't wide
enough, same for overall church interior shots. With family and
portraits in general you have time and ability to plan around that.
There are enough 12-24 lenses or some such thing for your wide
shooting of things other than people you can get eventually too.

We shoot all our high school senior portrait sessions at the beach
and in the studio with the 24-85D and 70-200 on a second body FWIW. I
use a 50 1.8 also.
we shoot group shots around 30mm. in fact I once did a review of my
images taken over a years time and found 33mm. to be my average focal
length for the year ( says a lot for owning a 30 or 35mm. prime) !!!!


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