A&P otap...which is the better decision? v.lenses

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by 3x, Dec 2, 2008.

  1. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    So as we all probably know, Live is doing the 30% cashback deal. My question for you guys is...

    Which setup would be the best?

    Tamron 18-270 + SB-600 + a little money to play around with

    or...

    Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 + Tamron 70-200 f/2.8

    I probably won't have any expendable cash for lenses for another six months, so I'll be using whatever I get now for a while :hs:
     
  2. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55
    neither.

    buy one of the lenses you really want, + the flash.

    No reason to waste money on a meidocre 'do it all' lens when you'll just end up selling it for one of the 2.8's down the road...

    What equipment do you have now?

    If you have a kit lens, I'd say you live with the kit lens and get the 70-200 + the flash until you can afford to upgrade to the 17-50.
     
  3. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,430
    Likes Received:
    109
    Location:
    Houston
    I learned my lesson with the 'all in one lens' stuff. Bought a Sigma 18-200 and used for maybe 2 months. Then sold it when I bought my 28-70... Buying a lens you want up front saves you a lot more lens lusting and money down the road.
     
  4. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    I bought body only, and I sold my 28-105 to my buddy for 50 bucks :o

    Edit: and I think my friend who borrowed my kit lens I was using on my D100 (off the same friend's D80) had it on his camera when his house was robbed :o :o
     
  5. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    a 28-70 isn't wide enough for me, especially with a crop sensor. i'm probably going to pick up the 17-50

    that's what i thought to myself, also, but sometimes (probably most of the gigs i get paid for) are of long-distance objects.
     
  6. Girth

    Girth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    71,430
    Likes Received:
    109
    Location:
    Houston
    I'm not saying that's the lens you should get, that's just what I got. If you want the Tamron 17-50, then that's what you should go with. Specially if its f2.8!!! And a flash is almost a must... They're oh so fun to use, specially in commander mode!
     
  7. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    yup, f2.8

    i do need a flash :o

    edit: at the same time, i'm not quite at the level you guys are at. most of my shooting is casual, if a paid gig comes i can always rent a lens...all i just don't know what to do.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2008
  8. wizeguy4

    wizeguy4 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allentown, PA
    17-50 f2.8 and sigma 50-150 f2.8
     
  9. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    any particular reason why you picked the sigma 50-150 f2.8 over the tamron?
     
  10. wizeguy4

    wizeguy4 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allentown, PA

    seamless transition with no loss of focal length and also HSM in the Sigma
     
  11. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    i'll consider it, it seems like 150 isn't long enough for me though. i seem to always struggle at times with a 210mm, but usually only at car related events
     
  12. wizeguy4

    wizeguy4 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,454
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allentown, PA
    most car related events are outdoors. toos a 1.4 or even a 2x TC and call it a day. you wont miss the stop of light outdoors unless it is dark out.
     
  13. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    hm...that is all very true :eek3:
     
  14. johan

    johan Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sahasrara; magnetic violet infinite
    18-270 is pure waste of money since you reveal you want 2.8's later on.

    just save & buy once. Dont ladder up. It's pointless.
     
  15. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    then again, this is also a lens that i'd like to have because there are often times when i'm doing casual shooting where i wish i had more reach. i don't always have my camera bag with me.
     
  16. xenon supra

    xenon supra OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    33,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    it's not the stop of light that i dislike about TC's, its the quality, they look like absolute shit wide open and stopping down to like 6.3 (if using a 2x) is pretty blah.
     
  17. 3x

    3x New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hella bro*cal
    most of the time i stop to f11 or more during the day to get the "blur" effect :o
     

Share This Page