D300 lens
- Thread starter gtc
- Start date
- Messages
- 8,193
- Name
- Pat MacInnes
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Unless there's something you're unable to do with your current setup then no 
17-55 is immensely good, as is the 80-200.
Someone will pipe up with the thought of buying a 50mm - unless you need faster than f/2.8 on your 17-55 then it's a bit pointless.
If you fancy going wiiiiiiide then it may be an option to look at something like a 12-24 or even a wide prime (10.5mm fisheye?) to extend that side if things.
The 25mm gap between your current lenses isn't massive, well, nothing a few forward or backward steps can't fix for free.
If macro is your thing then that may be an option; 60mm AF-D is s good value option and doubles up nicely as a portrait prime.
17-55 is immensely good, as is the 80-200.
Someone will pipe up with the thought of buying a 50mm - unless you need faster than f/2.8 on your 17-55 then it's a bit pointless.
If you fancy going wiiiiiiide then it may be an option to look at something like a 12-24 or even a wide prime (10.5mm fisheye?) to extend that side if things.
The 25mm gap between your current lenses isn't massive, well, nothing a few forward or backward steps can't fix for free.
If macro is your thing then that may be an option; 60mm AF-D is s good value option and doubles up nicely as a portrait prime.
