Replacement for 35-70

K

kevmalone

Messages
284
Edit My Images
No
At the moment I have a Tokina 11-16 2.8, Nikon 35-70 2.8 and a 80-200 2.8 which leaves a considerable gap in the main focal range.
The initial idea was to fill the gap with either a 17-35 zoom (expensive) or a prime 24 or 28.

However, having now fallen on hard times (upcoming wedding) another lens ain't possible, so was thinking of a direct replacement for the 35-70 with a bit more reach.

Was looking to get about £200 for the Nikon 35-70 (ebay research) but what can replace it with more reach?

Maybe a Sigma 24-70 2.8?

Any other suggestions for good(ish) lenses. Preferably a 2.8?

To throw a spanner in, was considering getting rid of the 11-16 to replace with a 12-24? What do the masses think?

TIA

Kev
 
By all accounts the 11-16 is better than any of the 12-24 flavours, albeit a shorter range, so if you're happy with it I would keep it.

The Tamron 24-135mm (if you can find one) has good reports but is not a 2.8.

I believe the Sigma 24-70 is rated quite highly but I think you would struggle budgetwise.

Some togs swear by the humble Nikkor 18-70 but again it's not a 2.8.

See if you can find a Tamron 28-70 2.8 but again I think you would be over £200.
 
Look for the sigma 28-70 2.8, i have one and im sure i picked it up for about 280 new last year, yes its 4mm shorter in range than the 24 but i can honestly say for the money i have no been disapointed although the focus can be a little annoying in low light
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top