which first: 17-50 or 70-200?

fontmoss

fontmoss

Messages
1,227
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
having travelled up and down this forum and others i have finally settled on a couple of lenses that id both like and can afford, the tamron 17-50 and 70-200.* BUT as I already have an 18-55, albeit a kit lens, i was wondring if it makes more sense to go for the 70-200? my concerns are that never having owned a telephoto im not sure ill use it enough and possibly i should get a cheap 55-200 first. alternatively i could replace the kit lens with the much faster tamron.

*sigh* patient guidance appreciated




*unless theres a reasonably priced f2.8 18-105ish lens? then all bets are off!
 
If you can afford both then sell the 18-55 and get both.

If you can't afford both at once then get the 70-200 and save up until you can afford to trade in the 18-55 for a 17-50. That way you'll have the focal length covered.

If you already know you want f/2.8 then I think there's little point in getting a 55-200 in the meantime cos it's just a stop-gap and you will lose money on it. Not a lot but who needs to lose money right now.

Good luck with your decision!
 
can only afford one right now just worried if i get the 70-200 it wont get used as much as a 17-50
 
You won't find an f/2.8 18-105!

You could find a 2nd-hand Tamron f/2.8 28-105 or 35-105, the latter in MF Adaptall as well as AF, but quite rare. The 28-105 is huge (full frame), and costs £150+. The 35-105 is about £100.

The Tamron 28-75 and 17-35 are more recent. The 17-35 is full frame and much bigger than the 17-50 but only f/2.8~4 and cheaper.

You could try a manual focus Tamron telephoto. They have a fine reputation and you needn't lose anything if you choose to sell it.
 
unless you shoot sport, I'd go for a 17-50 2.8 first.... it's the range you're used to, helps you get rid of the kit lens, and is a damn fine lens IMO - I'm really happy with mine. Just make sure if you've got a nikon d40 or 60 that you get one of the ones that it will focus with, not the older ones without the built in motor.
 
You'll use the zoom a lot more when you know you have it to hand... I'd go with the zoom purposely since you've already got a 18-55mm that does the job.
 
If you need to go over 50mm then I'd look at the 70-200 first.

The Tamron 17-50 is superb, but you do have that range covered, while you don't have anything over 55m..

I'm probably a voice in the wilderness but I don't think the 18-55 kit lens is that bad and depending what you are shooting should be more than adequate for the time being.
 
yeah the kit lens is good in good light but want something better in low light. im def leaning towards the zoom as ive got a 50 and 28mm fixed for low light and have hankered after somethin longer for sneaky candids and decent outisde shots but im still bit concerned about applications. now to convince my co=owner, my girlfriend...
 
I would say the 17-50 aswell, cracking lens and you know you have more use for it at present, then save for the 70-200
 
the thing is i hardly ever actually use the kit lens, i always use the 50mm fixed, and my gf isnt too bothered at the moment
 
If you do decide to go for a 70-200 then try one on your D40 first (assumng thats what its for), they are very big compared to a kit lens and quite heavy - without the battery grip it feels a little unbalanced even on my D80....
 
yeah having seen some then i fully expect to use my gf as some sort of balance device. not sure there are any to try here (madrid) some of the shops can be limited and unhelpful. im not sure theres such a thing as a fast light telephoto though?
 
fast light telephoto though?

Sigma 50-150 f/2.8?

Never used one personally, but I've seen one and they are surprisingly compact.
 
puddleduck said:
fast light telephoto though?

Sigma 50-150 f/2.8?

Never used one personally, but I've seen one and they are surprisingly compact.
Click to expand...

I was about to post the very same suggestion. :LOL:

I use one of these with my D90, it's nearly half the weight of the 70-200mm lens and in DX terms covers a similar range to a 70-200mm lens on FF.

Read the reviews on places like Fredmiranda.com and photozone.de (number of reviews on Google search too). I love mine and use it regularly for portraits and candid shots.
 
i recognise someone from the stw forum....

so what youre sayin is theres ANOTHER lens to think about. my brain hurts
 
just had a heft of the tamron, quite a meaty lens for the wee d40. looks like a sigma 50-150 then, shame camerabox dont do them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top