A&P Nikon mid range zoom

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by SenenCito, Dec 29, 2006.

  1. SenenCito

    SenenCito OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 21, 2002
    Messages:
    15,530
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    New York, NY
    this is like the most difficult choice eva, Ideally id love to get the nikon 17-55 2.8 piece of work, but the budget is tight and I can to a lot more with that money than waste it on one lens

    so in that particular range these are the lenses

    Sigma 18-50 2.8 Macro a new design, supposedly its quite nice

    Sigma 17-70 2.8 - 4.5
    its not a constant 2.8 lens but the range is almost the same as the kit lens..so this is a very interesting option

    Tamron 17-50 2.8
    Ive read also some good stuff from this lens, the extra wide angle would be useful

    Plus Tokina is also coming out with a new 16-50 lens, supposedly a jointly developed with pentax, so it should be interesting


    What would you guys choose if you couldnt pay the extra for the big nikon 17-55? Its driving me nuts thinking about it.
     
  2. Blair

    Blair New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    8,532
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    i am in the same boat, i wish nikon would make a 17-55f4 ED ala canon 17-40f4L
     
  3. hsubaru

    hsubaru New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I didn't pay for the 17-55, I'd probably have gone with the Tamon 17-50... but I never regret getting the 17-55, since I shoot in all weather, and this thing is a tank.

    What I really wanted was the 17-35, since 17 on full frame is freaking WIIIDE. But I'm quite happy with the 17-55, which stays on the camera for most of the time.

    Blair - it might be good budget-wise, but an f/4 is pretty useless indoors when you don't want to break out the flash ;)
     
  4. Blair

    Blair New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    8,532
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    you make a great point subie, but these days 90% of my shooting is outdoors so something like an f4 doesnt really bother me for landscapes and snow sports.

    however there is no doubt 2.8 is the way to go if budgets allow. any discussion about an f4 is considering budget in the equation.
     
  5. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
     
  6. Blair

    Blair New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    8,532
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    seems like there is a real love hate relationship with that lens. and doesn't it rely on the screw drive AF, seems like a step back compared to my 18-70.
     
  7. SenenCito

    SenenCito OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 21, 2002
    Messages:
    15,530
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    New York, NY

Share This Page