Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising

Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!

tflub

US
257 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
tflub Registered since 22nd Feb 2002
Fri 26-Jan-07 08:09 PM

During the past year or two I have realized that my favorite photography is people photography. Portraits, candids, events, and concerts. It's what I love to shoot and it's what I love to look at.

I've got a consumer-grade wide to tele zoom and a 12-24 and a 80-200 2.8. I want/need/covet a pro mid-range fast zoom. When I spend over a thousand bucks, I want to get the most versatile, useful lens for the money.

As many Nikonians have done in the past, I struggle with the decision between a 17-55 2.8 or a 28-70 2.8.

Now I'll ramble on about all of my considerations...

The 17-55 would be duplicative of the 12-24 in the 17-24 range. But if I carried the 17-55 instead of a 28-70, I might need to do fewer lens changes. And the 17-55 is really quite a bit smaller and lighter than the 28-70 so I could carry it around more, meaning I might have my good glass with me more. The 17-55 could not only serve as a great wide lens for concerts and portraits, but also serve as a good walk-around lens or 2 lens combo with my 80-200. The 17-55 is the traditional "normal" range, but it is neither very wide nor very telephoto. The biggest problem with the 17-55 is that 55mm is just a tad too short for candid portrait shots and zooming in at concerts. Also, I wouldn't be able to get as shallow of a depth of field for portrait type shots or tight enough for head shots as I could with the 28-70. But my 80-200 could do that.

The 28-70 seems too big to just carry around for general photography (especially with the hood). I fear the 28-70 will always need to be accompanied by my 12-24 because it is not nearly wide enough on a DSLR. The 28-70 might prepare me for when an affordable full frame DSLR comes out. I could also use it on my film camera. I never shoot film any more, but you never know, I might want to go "old school". And the 28-70 is a couple of hundred dollars more expensive.

Those are just some of the variables. But the bottom line is that my favorite type of photography is people, and specifically my son and shooting concerts and family events. Is 42mm equivalent of the 28-70 wide enough most of the time? Or should I look at it this way -- will my 80-200 satisfy me with respect to what I would want at 70mm from the 28-70, so I should get the more versatile 17-55?

I am having a really hard time deciding. Depending on the situation, I would always prefer one lens or the other. The 28-70 seems perfect for portraits but isn't wide enough. The 17-55 is wide enough for general photography but a tad too short for candid portraits.

Ahhh!

Flub

Please vivit my photo-centric blog: www.shutterblogger.blogspot.com

Subject
ID
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
1
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
2
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
4
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
3
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
5
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
6
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
9
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
10
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
11
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
12
          Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
24
               Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
39
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
7
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
8
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
13
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
14
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
15
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
16
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
17
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
18
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
19
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
20
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
48
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
49
          Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
50
               Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
51
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
58
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
21
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
23
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
25
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
29
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
35
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
30
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
22
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
27
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
31
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
34
          Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
37
               Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
38
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
26
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
28
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
32
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
33
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
36
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
45
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
55
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
40
Reply message My vote is for the 28-70
41
Reply message RE: My vote is for the 28-70
42
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
43
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
44
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
46
          Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
53
          Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
54
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
47
Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
52
     Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
56
          Reply message RE: Ahhh! 17-55 or 28-70?!?!
57

G