Thinking of a swap.

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by bmiller, Jul 14, 2008.

  1. I have an idea that might be foolish, but heh, we all have our moments. I have a 17-55 2.8 and the "beast". I find the Beast gets used more traveling and outdoor use and the 17-55 more for confined or indoor situations. I ended up taking the Beast to Arizona. It earned the right to be called the "beast" while i was hiking around Tucson.
    My thought was to sell them both, and get the 24-70. Silly idea? I don't know. The sale would provide enough cash to buy the 24-70 with a little left over.
    I still have the 12-24 for the wider end, which i don't use much anyway.
    Has anyone regretted their decision?

    Brad
     
  2. Go for it. :smile:
     
  3. The answer is even easier if the D700 is in your sights right around the corner.
     
  4. It's what I would do if I had the money or the trades. I LOVE my 17-55, but miss not having anything it and my 80-200. A 24-70 would solve that.
     
  5. Hi Brad - I bought a 24-70, and haven't used my 17-55 since. You mention you have the 12-24 for the wide end coverage, which is similar to my situation (I have a Sigma 10-20). It's all about personal needs and shooting style of course, and mine might be different from yours. But I've not regretted my decision, and in fact will likely be selling the 17-55 soon.
     
  6. I have a D300 and a barely used D200. I can't justify a D700 right now. Maybe 2 lenses for one and 2 cameras for one. I like the sound of that.
    The Camera Store in Calgary Alberta seems to be short the 24-70. I buy from them to save the 8% tax.
    Brad
     
  7. The 24-70 is awesome. My "beast" hasn't seen action in the past two months. The 24-70 is stealing all of the D300's time..... I still use my 17-55 sometimes, though. The 17-55 is still good for the "one lens" walkaround when I'm w/ my young kids. They don't stray too far and I use the 17-24 end alot. When it's just me and the wife, the 24-70 is the one.
     
  8. Cleo68

    Cleo68

    Jul 7, 2008
    Bedford, MA
    This is de-ja-vu. Just went through this a million times with Canon. They have similar lenses - the 17-55 2.8 IS and the 24-70L 2.8. Both are fantastic lenses, but the focal lengths are clearly better for crop v. full frame bodies. I wish I understood where they are going with this. Do they think people will continue to buy croppers, or go to all full frame? I know many like the longer length you get with the crops. Maybe they want everyone to buy both?! I wound up with Canon's 17-55 on the 40D. I'd likely do the same with Nikon. But I'm making use of the kit for now. Not even going to go there at this point... (Oh, and what's the "beast"? Canon had the "brick," which was the 24-70L - weighed a friggin ton, lol.)