nikon lens for 7100
Sep 7, 2014 22:55:12 #
I have a 17-55 2.8 and assorted "kit" lenses. Would buying the 24-70 be a redundant lens or should I look for the 300 sizes.
Sep 7, 2014 22:58:53 #
Sep 7, 2014 23:11:56 #
Sep 7, 2014 23:14:56 #
Sep 7, 2014 23:15:52 #
innershield wrote:
I have a 17-55 2.8 and assorted "kit" lenses. Would buying the 24-70 be a redundant lens or should I look for the 300 sizes.
Your 17-55mm F2.8 is a work of art and as fine as any 24-70mm on your crop sensor body. Keep it, use it, enjoy it. Selling for a 24-70 and losing all that wide end makes no sense at all.
Sep 7, 2014 23:16:30 #
Sep 7, 2014 23:20:12 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Your 17-55mm F2.8 is a work of art and as fine as any 24-70mm on your crop sensor body. Keep it, use it, enjoy it. Selling for a 24-70 and losing all that wide end makes no sense at all.
:thumbup:
That 17-55 is a pro-level lens, made back when Nikon didn't make a "full-frame" camera.
It is the best DX zoom Nikon makes and it is excellent.
I had an "OMG" moment when I first used one.
Sep 7, 2014 23:25:53 #
On the other hand (there is a foot), if you can't help yourself and want to switch lenses, box of the 17-55 and send it to me, I'll even pay the postage, ;)
Sep 8, 2014 00:39:20 #
Everyone should branch out and replace the "kit" lenses with higher performance models. You will be greatly pleased at the improvements.
Sep 8, 2014 05:24:31 #
Sep 8, 2014 08:30:46 #
steve_stoneblossom
Loc: Rhode Island, USA
For your 7100, it seems to me there's too much redundancy between the 17-55 and 24-70. If it were me, I would be more interested in replacing my kit lenses with a 70-200 to compliment the 17-55. How hard can it be to cover a 15mm gap with your feet? The 17-55 is a great lens.
Sep 8, 2014 13:37:36 #
The above answer by Steve Stoneblossom makes great sense. I think to buy a 24-70 when the 17-55 has great reviews isn't necessary. I have a D7000 and in my lens kit always find myself lacking on the wide end. I wouldn't give up that 17". IMHO.
Sep 9, 2014 22:27:24 #
I have always heard great reviews on the Nikon 17-55 2.8 My question is why have they not up graded it to include VR (vibration reduction)?
Sep 10, 2014 10:28:39 #
Mike W. wrote:
I have always heard great reviews on the Nikon 17-55 2.8 My question is why have they not up graded it to include VR (vibration reduction)?
They haven't upgraded the 24-70 FX lens either.
To be honest, I have never missed having VR on shorter lenses.
Sep 10, 2014 10:32:18 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
They haven't upgraded the 24-70 FX lens either.
To be honest, I have never missed having VR on shorter lenses.
To be honest, I have never missed having VR on shorter lenses.
I have used the Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 VC lens, I saw no advantage to the VC (VR) on that lens and it was not as sharp as the Nikon anyway, so I returned it. I was considering it as a rental lens but couldn't justify the expense if it didn't perform as well as my Nikon and Canon rentals.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.