Worth Getting 35/2.4 if already have 16-45 f/4?

Started Mar 11, 2012 | Discussions thread
Twong Contributing Member • Posts: 849
Re: Worth Getting 35/2.4 if already have 16-45 f/4?

I bought a 35 f/2.4 recently even though I already have a Tamron 17-50. They serve different purposes. For travel, I don't bring any prime. But primes are great for specific applications and when I know I have time. The only exception is the Samyang 14 f/2.8. It is a big lens but I don't have a large aperture UWA.

magomago wrote:

35mm is such a great focal length on crop (also a great length for a different perspective on FF)

I also have the 16-45 and it is a great lens, but f/4 can be blegh sometimes on a K-20D. And no, that camera isn't changing anytime soon...unless the K-5 wants to drop to about 500 dollars (fat chance LOL)

I'm going to be taking a trip to Hawaii and I was curious to know if at 35mm, this lens performed better than the 16-45.

I did a search on google as well as this forums, and what I largely found was people deciding which lense to buy first--> most went for the 16-45 because it gave them the ability to zoom, the latter could be more quickly bought later on since it was cheaper...but none of these really said if it was worth purchasing 4 of them.

The main reason to get a 35 would be, (A) faster and (B) I'm a fixed lens whore, and would my 50mm more often if it wasn't simply too long for outdoors use.

I was thinking of goiang
16-45 ; hiking trails and all that natur stuff
35mm ; fun at the beach and enjoying touristy areas

55-300 ; far away zoom shots (is it honestly even worth bringing this? In all my trips I find that only 2-5% of the time I wish I lad a longer lense)

 Twong's gear list:Twong's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PM2 Pentax K-3 II Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA* 50-135mm F2.8 ED (IF) SDM Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM +18 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow