28-70 recommendation

Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
336
Location
Warsaw, Poland
I have been reading a lot about this lens in these forums, apparently held in very high esteem. This is one of the good glass which I dont have.
Is this lens really so good. I have the 17-55 and the 24-85/3.5, which is not in this class, but in this range.
The 17-55 is always on the camera, would I find myself using the 28-70 lens a lot too? Anybody has the 17-55 and the 28-70, both ? Which one do you use more ?
Thanks in advance.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2005
Messages
1,027
Location
Annandale, VA
Riki said:
I have been reading a lot about this lens in these forums, apparently held in very high esteem. This is one of the good glass which I dont have.
Is this lens really so good. I have the 17-55 and the 24-85/3.5, which is not in this class, but in this range.
The 17-55 is always on the camera, would I find myself using the 28-70 lens a lot too? Anybody has the 17-55 and the 28-70, both ? Which one do you use more ?
Thanks in advance.

Yes! I sold my 24-85/f2.8 for it and am delighted. It's on my D2X almost all the time. Try getting it used from someone on this site. You can pretty much trust just about anyone and you can save a bundle. It's not called the "monster" for nothing though. People will stare at you....in awe! It's a MANLY lens. :wink: :wink:

Rich
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
1,920
Location
Tennessee
I don't have the 17-55mm but I do own the 17-35mm. Since I got the 28-
70mm the 17-35mm does not comeout that much. Very seldom do I go
wider then 28mm. The Beast is a great lens and has taken over the
number one spot in my bag.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
12,409
Location
East Norriton, PA
I just picked this up and let me tell you it is a gem great sharpness, wonderful color and contrast adn great bokeh.
here is a shot from last night
original.gif
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
336
Location
Warsaw, Poland
Thanks

Thanks for your replies. Wow, what a handsome dog and a wonderful picture, Mike.
Great, now have something to look forward to viz(the Beast). Actually when I went digital with the D100, I had only one lens the 24-85/3.5-4.5, which honestly I loved. All the family enlargements in my house have been taken with this lens. Then the Lens Lust took over and I started the additions (14 at last count) , and the 24-85 got shelved and the 17-55 took its place. I always had liked this higher range though.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
4,741
Location
SE Florida
RIch, there will probably never be one for sale here

It's that good.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Location
San Jose, CA
Riki said:
Is this lens really so good... The 17-55 is always on the camera, would I find myself using the 28-70 lens a lot too?

The 28-70 is very good, but so is the 17-55. To be honest, it doesn't make any sense to have both. One or the other would just end up gathering dust. If you're happy with your 17-55, look elsewhere to get your Lens Lust fix. Jmho.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
145
Location
SF Bay Area
Riki,

Frank is right (as usual).

If your shooting style tends to the long end - get the 28-70.

If you shoot wide, the 17-55 will be just fine.

As Simon says...it's only about 2 giant steps forward from 55 to 70mm. It's about 4 to 6 giant steps backward from 28 to 17 though.

IMHO, you ought to keep the 24-85 and the 17-55. The 24-85 isn't a bad lens and is a very compact walkaround solution which is quite sharp as well as being more discreet than the beasties.

To have both would be a great luxury, but redundant.

Spend your LL dollars for perhaps a 70-200VR, an 85 1.4 or perhaps a 35 2.0. :wink:
 
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
336
Location
Warsaw, Poland
Thank Frank and Mike for your comments. I understand though am a bit disappointed at not being able to buy it (LL). I love the 17-55, surely wouldnt want it to gather dust. Thanks for your advice.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2005
Messages
98
Location
Bayside, NY
Riki said:
Thank Frank and Mike for your comments. I understand though am a bit disappointed at not being able to buy it (LL). I love the 17-55, surely wouldnt want it to gather dust. Thanks for your advice.

I ran into the same predicament as you did and it looks like I'll be selling the 17-55 to finance a 28-70 conversion. I just missed the longer reach (albeit small) more than the wide angle aspect.
 
Joined
May 23, 2005
Messages
745
How about you try out a Tamron 28-75 XR DI?
It's not nikon pro glass, but it is f/2.8 and the range you seek. It's under $400, has very nice close focusing down to like 10 inches, and VERY small. Have you held the 28-70 from nikon?

Maybe it will help you decide if you need to sell that 17-55. I think it might make a nice complement to your existing lens.
 
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
336
Location
Warsaw, Poland
Thanks Twig for your suggestion. I dont like third party glass. I havent seen the 28-70 but I believe it is big. I have a lot of primes covering this entire range like the 28/1.4, 45/2.8, 50/1.4, 60/2.8, 85/1.4. So probably will wait until the next offering from Nikon comes up. Hopefully a 28-70VR.
 
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
336
Location
Warsaw, Poland
Hi Paul.
Come to think of it, never thought of HSC and the 17-55. Thanks for the great tip.
 

Latest threads

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
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom