AFS 17-35 f2.8 or AFS 28-70 f2.8

[scubnasa]

Am still using film camera, but not sure which lense is better. Sometimes i do take wide angle but sometimes i do take normal pic. Need opinion.. Thanks.:)

[ShaolinTiger]

Different range, if you want wide angle better get 17-35, for more versatile range with a bit more reach get 28-70.

[karheng]

If you are using film, I suggest getting the 28-70 as it offers the wide angle of 28mm and a short tele of 70mm. The 17-35 may be a bit too wide for your needs, as posted...

[noruazumi]

if i were u-lah, i would go for the 17-35 because of the wide angle.
but again, if u really want wide-angle, 12-24 is the choice.
but i will still go for 17-35 over the 28-70.

[Vodka]

using F5??

[ShaolinTiger]

if i were u-lah, i would go for the 17-35 because of the wide angle.
but again, if u really want wide-angle, 12-24 is the choice.
but i will still go for 17-35 over the 28-70.

He's using film camera, 12-24 is a DX lens dude.

[noruazumi]

He's using film camera, 12-24 is a DX lens dude.
dang! didn't noticed he mentioned that he used film! :redface:
my bad! :run_away:

[scubnasa]

using F5??
yes, of course. no DSLR yet!!!:D:D:D
last time took wedding but now got lazy already la.. now, just carry my lovely F5 around to take pic. but to do this with 28-70 in KL?? waa sure ppl :0:0 look at me one :D:D
k... good feedback from u guys!! still wondering..err which one to get arr...

[raclette]

ive read somewhere that the nikkor 17 35 afs is a great lens for film photography but just above average in digitals. Anyway, i second ST for the 17 35 over the 28 70 for the wide angle reason.. its a personal opinion though..

[leslie]

17-35 :P Nikon....perfect fit for a film body :D if $$ is not your concern

[seethoe]

17-35, 28-70 and 70-200VR is THE lens for nikon for most general photog...so either one you would not go wrong. depend what u like to shoot, if portraits and photojournalism then the 28-70 maybe more useful while 17-35maybe more useful for landscape. if u shoot exclusively portrait then 85 f/1.4 is THE lens......

[scubnasa]

17-35, 28-70 and 70-200VR is THE lens for nikon for most general photog...so either one you would not go wrong. depend what u like to shoot, if portraits and photojournalism then the 28-70 maybe more useful while 17-35maybe more useful for landscape. if u shoot exclusively portrait then 85 f/1.4 is THE lens......
alamak... plss dont give me headache laa... 85mm f1.4?? :?:? :D:D
anyway, am currently using 24-120VR and perhaps if am getting 17-35mm, this one will go to my F5 (purfect combo!!) and 24-120VR for at least a DSLR (dont know yet!:D:D) now already covered from 17mm to 180mm.

[karheng]

Ah that helps a bit! If u are using the 24-120, why bother with the other option? Go for the 17-35 straight....I won't recommend the other one then!

[bitbytes9]

If money is not the issue take both

[seethoe]

ah...u hv a 24-120VR...then go for wide angle lah...17-35.

[Vodka]

i tot F5 fullframe?? correct me if im wrong....

[ShaolinTiger]

i tot F5 fullframe?? correct me if im wrong....

Yes it's full frame AND you get a new sensor every time you press the shutter.

Cool eh?

[Vodka]

hahaa..... 28-70f/2.8 la... haha

[scubnasa]

Yes it's full frame AND you get a new sensor every time you press the shutter.

Cool eh?
of course la full frame... it's a film camera!!

hahaa..... 28-70f/2.8 la... haha
now thinking again.. shud i wait for the 'coming soon' new lens? heard about 17-85 f/2.8??? :D:D:D:tongue_roll:

[ShaolinTiger]

now thinking again.. shud i wait for the 'coming soon' new lens? heard about 17-85 f/2.8??? :D:D:D:tongue_roll:

If there's such a lens or even a 17-55mm f/2.8 MKII it'll be a DX lens again, so don't hold your breath :)

[nikonuser]

Is it safe to get a DX lens? Won't all DX lens be wasted if in near future all DSLR become full frame?

[ShaolinTiger]

Is it safe to get a DX lens? Won't all DX lens be wasted if in near future all DSLR become full frame?

That's your choice, personally I'll be sticking with cropped sensors, the advantages are better IMHO especially if they can get the noise problem down to a reasonable level there will be no need to use FF sensor unless you really want that super narrow DoF and slightly better dynamic range.

[Vodka]

If there's such a lens or even a 17-55mm f/2.8 MKII it'll be a DX lens again, so don't hold your breath :)

hahaa.... may be 17-55 D lens :tongue_roll:

[nikonuser]

Got an interesting link here....if this is true then I have no qualms sticking to DX. Cheaper and more compact.

http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/full-frame/review.html

[alvinlau]

For film and FF, 28-70mm. For DSLR, 17-35mm or 17-55mm.

[Master]

17-35mm is the only one to get.

[scubnasa]

17-35mm is the only one to get.
hey master, cool avatar!! pink floyd fan?? cool man!:rasta::partyon::rasta::partyon:

[noordin]

You're a winner with either. I'd go for the wide one, 17-35mm.

[scubnasa]

wow... at the end am closing this thread and well, thanks for all the info & support! :partyon:
it has been nearly 2 months am with AFS 28-70 & no regrets as it is very very very sharp than 24-120VR. Even better than AFD 50mm f1.4, maybe bcos of it's "AFS". Now it's time to buy more Velvia 50 again and some other print films. The lens works very fast with F5. It's time to hang up photos on the wall!! :partyon::partyon:
Glad that i am still a "Full Frame" person... no DSLR yet, ehehe perhaps D3 in future?? :gatal::gatal::Eyecrazy::Eyecrazy: