Quote:
Originally Posted by diskojoe
Why not get the 24-70 f2.8? Now that a walking lens and it would be the same as a 16mm on apsc.
If I went Nikon I would get this set up:
14-24 f2.8; 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8
so then you have 14-200mm with a constant f2.8 stop. Three lenses and you could do almost anything. Add a 85mm f1.4 and I would never need anything else except maybe a fisheye for fun.
|
24-70 is very large, and very heavy. Plus, as mentioned, I prefer the extra range on the wide end. I have 35-70mm covered by my 50mm prime, and taking a few steps forward or backwards. I already have a 70-300mm full frame lens, though it's not a 2.8.
I've put a lot of thought into it, and I definitely think the 17-35 is a better fit for me than the 24-70.