| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Nikon 17-35mm or 24-70mm What should I get?
Mark Perlstein, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Plano | TX | USA | Posted: 11:22 AM on 11.28.09 |
| ->> I am switching from Nikon DX lenses/format to full frame D700. Undecided on getting 17-35 or 24-70. I have been using dx format with 12-24, 17-55 and 70-200. Getting rid of 12-24, and 17-55. What do you use? |
|
Jonathan Castner, Photographer, Assistant
|
Longmont | CO | USA | Posted: 12:05 PM on 11.28.09 |
| ->> I rarely use my 17-35 except for shooting architectural interiors. My main lens on my D700's is my AF-S 28-70 f/2.8 as I rarely use anything wider than that. Even during my film days my 20mm would get used 3-4 times a year so the 17-35 was really in my bag because of the crop factor on my prior bodies so that I would have a 24mm-ish lens. |
|
Matt Cashore, Photographer
|
South Bend | IN | USA | Posted: 12:26 PM on 11.28.09 |
| ->> The 24-70 is one of the sharpest lenses I have ever used. Zoom or prime. The 17-35 is...not. |
|
Debra L Rothenberg, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 12:36 PM on 11.28.09 |
->> I pulled out my 17-35 this week-the first time I have used it in ages. I also had the 24-70 with me and it sat in the bag
I am glad I didn't get rid of it |
|
David Manning, Photographer
|
Athens | GA | | Posted: 1:11 PM on 11.28.09 |
->> The habitual focusing problems that i have with the 17-35 are less prominent on the D700 then the D2X i use for work. The D700's AF is a significant improvement but it still irks me.
However they still are prominent and i would highly recommend the 24-70 instead. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 1:49 PM on 11.28.09 |
->> I personally find the 24-70 wide enough for most anything I shoot, and carry a 17mm Tokina prime with me for the few times it isn't.
That works for me, but really the best advice I think I could give you is to ask if you felt your 17-55 was a good range for you when you where shooting DX, as 24-70 on FX will be similar.
If your style of shooting had you always leaving the 12-24 on the camera, then 17-35mm would probably be a better bet.
Another option would be to go with the 24-70 and then add a 14-24mm down the road, then you'd have the 3 best Nikon zooms (some would argue the best zooms period)and should be able to cover anything. |
|
Nic Coury, Photographer
|
Monterey | CA | | Posted: 2:34 PM on 11.28.09 |
->> It really depends on how you shoot.
I've found a shoot wider, 24-35mm a lot or past 70mm, so that mid-range is kinda not super useful. I have a 60 to fill in when I need it.
I did use my 28-70 quite a bit, but I sold it. A 35 prime would do me perfect, but alas none.
I like the range of my 20-35 a lot, but probably could shoot tight, but I like the usage of the 17-35 on both FF, usually at 35 or on a cropped body. |
|
Samuel Lewis, Photographer
|
Miami | FL | USA | Posted: 3:26 PM on 11.28.09 |
->> I agree with Nic that it really depends upon how you shoot. However, if you can live with 24mm on the wide end, the 24-70 is a fantastic lens (and probably the sharpest lens I've ever seen at 50mm).
While the 17-35 is a fantastic lens, when packing light I will leave that behind and take the 24-70.
Hope this helps. |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 3:32 PM on 11.28.09 |
| ->> 24-70mm no doubt. |
|
Dave Einsel, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Houston | TX | United States | Posted: 4:36 PM on 11.28.09 |
| ->> Absolutely 24-70mm. It's the best zoom lens I have ever used. Pick up a used 18mm if you need something wider. Or, unless you hate it, keep the 12-24 for a while since it will work in DX mode on the D700. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 4:45 PM on 11.28.09 |
->> 24-70mm is almost a must for a number of different types of photography.
I tried a 12-24mm for a week. Sold it on eBay for a bit more than I paid for it, then bought a 14-24mm, which isn't for everybody but is a outrageous lens. I've owned a 17-35mm, I concur, not the best lens in the world.
How you see things, the things you shoot will determine what works best. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 6:03 PM on 11.28.09 |
->> You will miss not having a wide zoom if you used your 12-24 a lot. Again it really all depends on what you shoot.
Photojournalists sometimes do a 17-35 and a 50/1.4 prime along with their 70-200. With high megapixel cameras you can crop a 50 to a 70 fov and still have a lot to work with, which is why some PJs go that route. I've done that sometimes when I need to pack light.
That said, I have a 24-70 and it's a fine lens, but it's really kind of a boring focal length. It's not really tight, it's not really wide. Functional, but boring.
I didn't do the 17-35 but instead went with the 14-24, which is an awesome lens. I use my 14-24 a whole lot more than my 24-70, but it's definitely a style choice. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|