Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Phillydog1958" data-source="post: 292576" data-attributes="member: 8704"><p>Yea, I'd agree with Glenn. The 16-35 is great, but the 24-70 would probably be ideal for shooting in low-light situations. I've not used my 16-35 in low-light venues. I plan on trying it out in low light soon. I just rarely find myself in that situation. I also want to add that the 16-35 does have VR, which Nikon added, because they felt that VR would allow for the lens to perform better in low light and make up for the speed issue (Longer hand-held exposures). Personally, the 24-70 is on my wish list. I'm just waiting for a great price opportunity to come about. I've seen new units on ebay for $1300-$1500. I can't pay Nikon's MSRP of almost $1900.</p></blockquote><p></p>