A lack of excitement about the 18-35 3.5-4.5?

Started Feb 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
jhinkey
jhinkey Senior Member • Posts: 2,798
Re: I'm not

Rich Rosen wrote:

jhinkey wrote:

We'll have to see if this updated WA zoom can make me sell my 17-35AFS.

And that is why I am not excited. Why would I give up a really good UWA zoom, with fixed aperture for a unit with variable aperture. If any thing you should have sold your 17-35 for the 16-35 f4.

Why would I trade it out for the 16-35/4?  For nearly equivalent performance at a higher cost?  Don't need VR for what I do with the 17-35 so the 16-35 is higher cost, lower weight, but longer.  Not the best trade for me.

It will be particularly interesting when (if) Nikon comes out with it's patented 16-35/2.8AFS VR.

Still not enough for me to give up an old friend. The 14-24 had me thinking for awhile. But when I held it at Photo Plus in NYC a couple of years ago, I knew that a honker like that would be used on an extremely limited basis. Certainly not a travel lens; even less so than the 17-35.

Not sure why the 14-24 came up in the conversation.

So if the 16-35/2.8AFS VR trounces the 17-35 you still might not give it up?  I might not either if the cost in $$, weight, and size is too great.

 jhinkey's gear list:jhinkey's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Nikon D800 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 +21 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
xtm
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow