Nikon DX 17-55 F2.8 vs 24-70 F2.8?

I have a D3000 with 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses and am looking to upgrade lenses (body will come later). I initially was thinking about the 70-200 2.8 VRII, but I tend to use the shorter zoom more often than the tele, so it seems to make more senses to get one of the two in the title first. Most frequent subject is my 2 kids (ages 3 y and 13 months) both at home and out and about. Any recommendations or advice between the two? Is one thought to have better image quality than the other? Better bokeh?

ariep said:

I have a D3000 with 18-55 and 55-200 kit lenses and am looking to upgrade lenses (body will come later). I initially was thinking about the 70-200 2.8 VRII, but I tend to use the shorter zoom more often than the tele, so it seems to make more senses to get one of the two in the title first. Most frequent subject is my 2 kids (ages 3 y and 13 months) both at home and out and about. Any recommendations or advice between the two? Is one thought to have better image quality than the other?

Click to expand...

Both are fine lenses. One is wider and the other a little more telephoto so consider how you shoot and decide if you prefer wider or longer. The other consideration is DX vs. FX. The 17-55 is DX and the 24-70 is FX. If you plan to upgrade to FX the 24-70 might be a better choice.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Maybe you would like to have a look into the 35 f/1.8G or 50mm f/1.8G. The first one is great for general photography, the second great for portraits on DX. Both are fast, sharp and do not cost a fortune.

The 24-70 f2.8 is the lens usually on my camera, probably less than optimum on a dx body but really great on an fx body.

jwstl said:

Both are fine lenses. One is wider and the other a little more telephoto so consider how you shoot and decide if you prefer wider or longer. The other consideration is DX vs. FX. The 17-55 is DX and the 24-70 is FX. If you plan to upgrade to FX the 24-70 might be a better choice.

Click to expand...

The other consideration is cost. You can usually find a used 17-55 for about half the price of a new 24-70.

Thanks for all the replies everyone. I'm leaning toward the 24-70 as I think that focal length range will be most useful for me, and it will be better if I upgrade to an FX body later. I did consider a prime, but prefer the convenience of a zoom.