1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

17-55 2.8 or 12-24 4, help me decide!

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Perreault, May 8, 2007.

  1. Perreault


    Nov 24, 2006
    I know there is a lot of collective wisdom on the cafe.

    The Revenu-Quebec (or the IRS for the US) has been very generous this year. I need help deciding what my next lens will be. I am not a pro photographer but I enjoy photography as a serious hobby. I try to do all kind of photos (portraits and landscape mostly). You can have a look at yvesperr.smugmug.com to get an idea.

    I presently own a 70-200 2.8 VR (fantastic) and a 18-200 VR (very practical but slow). I went today at my photo store and played with a 17-55 2.8 and a 12-24 f4.

    What sould I do, sell the 18-200 and get the 17-55 or add the 12-24???

    Please give me your toughts on this dilemma...

  2. cadman


    Dec 4, 2006
    Johns Creek, GA
    That's what I did. Sold the 18-200 got the 17-55 and the 70-200.

    Sooo glad I did. The 17-55 will make you just as happy at that range as the 70-200 does in it's range.

    Fast is good!
  3. I'd go with this suggestion as its what I did too. No more lens creep either.
  4. jaleel


    Apr 3, 2007
    Toronto, Canada
    i would have kept my 18-200VR if i could have.. when i travel out of the country i like to go light and that is the best travelling lens barnone

    i sold it and went with the 17-55 because i shoot a lot in that range.. my 70-200 is for sports
  5. Arif

    Arif Guest

    I have both and initially used the 18-200 when I travelled but now, the 17-55 hardly leaves my camera. The optics are great and I like having the extra stop. Still like the 18-200 for the convenience, but as I become more fussy with my picture quality and try to get in closer to people to capture the feeling, I prefer the 17-55. It just feels great to hold and the sharpness is phenomenal. I personally think it is a great wedding lens.

    Good luck,
  6. Ray C.

    Ray C.

    Nov 7, 2005
    I love my 17-55 for PJ work, but its not quite wide enough for some landscapes, and too short for portraits. So perhaps you may consider a Sigma 10-20mm (or Tokina 12-24), Nikon 35-70mm and Nikon 85mm f/1.8 for about the same price as a 17-55...
  7. Zachs


    Feb 25, 2006
    There is also the Tamron 17-50 + Sigma 10-20 (would make more sense than the 12-24 considering the 17mm of the tammy) for the price of the Nikon...used.
  8. GKR1


    Apr 19, 2007
    San Diego
    I would go for the 12-24. Add a 50mm 1.4 and you have very nice setup until you can pick up a 17-55.
  9. Perreault


    Nov 24, 2006
    Thanks all of you for your inputs! I got the 17-55 2.8 and will see what I can do with it...

  10. canuckr


    Apr 9, 2007
    CBD Detroit
    Good choice, congrats..I have both, the 17-55 and the 12-24.. The 17-55 is used about 95% of the time..
  11. DITTO

  12. Double Ditto!!
  13. Snipps


    Oct 7, 2006
  14. Zee71


    Apr 1, 2007
    Queens, NY
    17-55 is the way to go! I'm going to be adding that to my lens outfit in the future. Ditto and more ditto to the previous ditto's!
  15. StefanosL.


    Sep 5, 2006
    I currently own a 70-200, 17-55 & the Sigma 10-20. I'm happy.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.