Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Vincent" data-source="post: 387480" data-attributes="member: 15675">I have been looking into this lens.It is the predecessor of the 24-70 and for that made for the same users, so to the same standards.Some claim it is optically better. Some claim you should move a step forward or backward with your 50mm to have an even better solution (+ crop a little).Personally I keep getting stuck, since this is not the range I mostly shoot I will not spend the Nikon 24-70 money. I run with my back in the wall or flowerpots with the 50mm.The 28-70 is better in price. The Tamron 24-70 has a good reputation.The 35-70 is cheap (I`m trying very cheap), but I think I would like something wider then 35mm for landscapes/group portraits.For walking around on events 35-70 seems fine to me.My dilemma is that the 35-70 + an IAS 24mm is not that much less then a new (gey market) 24-70 Tamron.A lot more expensive is a 16-35 f4 + 35-70 f2,8, which seems to come too close to a Nikon 24-70 price.Even wondering if the 28mm f1,8 + 50mm f1,8 is not a very nice alternative, but on parties you just need to move fast in framing and a zoom is nice.So 35-70 is an excellent quality price, but if you need more range, does it still make sense? Do primes not deliver more?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Vincent, post: 387480, member: 15675"] I have been looking into this lens. It is the predecessor of the 24-70 and for that made for the same users, so to the same standards. Some claim it is optically better. Some claim you should move a step forward or backward with your 50mm to have an even better solution (+ crop a little). Personally I keep getting stuck, since this is not the range I mostly shoot I will not spend the Nikon 24-70 money. I run with my back in the wall or flowerpots with the 50mm. The 28-70 is better in price. The Tamron 24-70 has a good reputation. The 35-70 is cheap (I`m trying very cheap), but I think I would like something wider then 35mm for landscapes/group portraits. For walking around on events 35-70 seems fine to me. My dilemma is that the 35-70 + an IAS 24mm is not that much less then a new (gey market) 24-70 Tamron. A lot more expensive is a 16-35 f4 + 35-70 f2,8, which seems to come too close to a Nikon 24-70 price. Even wondering if the 28mm f1,8 + 50mm f1,8 is not a very nice alternative, but on parties you just need to move fast in framing and a zoom is nice. So 35-70 is an excellent quality price, but if you need more range, does it still make sense? Do primes not deliver more? [/QUOTE]

Verification