Quote:
Originally Posted by bulliver
The two lenses are different beasts for different purposes. The 17-35 would be my 'walking around" lens, sort of like a 18-55 on a crop sensor, except it has the extra reach on the wide end rather than the long end.
Eventually I will get an ultrawide, whether the 14-24 or the 14mm prime I have not decided yet. I have heard the zoom is sharper than the prime, so I would like to try both and see if the lesser optical quality is a good trade off for a smaller and cheaper lens.
|
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.