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

Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
160
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...

Thanks,
Yves
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
301
Location
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!
 
R

Removed User 3

Guest
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!
I'd go with this suggestion as its what I did too. No more lens creep either.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
90
Location
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
 
A

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,
Arif
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
650
Location
Thailand
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...
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Messages
884
Location
NC
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.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
1,747
Location
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.
 
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
160
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
Thanks all of you for your inputs! I got the 17-55 2.8 and will see what I can do with it...

Yves
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
2,156
Location
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!
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom