Nikon 24-70 or a Nikon 17-55 and Nikon 12-24

raider2727

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,108
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a Nikon 24-70 f2.8 and although i do love it i have no funds to buy any more kit as i also own a 70-200 f2.8 VR, a Nikon 50mm f1.8 and as from Sunday a Nikon 1.7 TC which has wiped out all funds, but i would like a wide lens.

I have been offered 2 mint lenses and £50 for a swap for my 24-70, the lenses being a Nikon 17-55 f2.8 and a Nikon 12-24 f4, as i say they are both mint but not boxed (probably just anal but i normally only buy boxed lenses)
The problem i just cant decide if i should swap or not.

I do not have any specific area of photography i cover, it is just general photography.

Pros,
i would have a range from 12-55 and 70-200 plus the 1.7TC
As i use a D300 the wider angles would be better for my landscapes

Cons
Letting go of a fab lens.

Any thoughts
 
Swapping that lens for 2 DX lenses seems like a horrid backward step to me.

Why not just buy a Tokina 12-24 if you want to go wider? That lens will also work from 17mm to 24mm on a full frame camera if you ever go that way.

Boxes are irrelevant, assuming you plan to put the lenses on your camera and shoot, rather than erm... keep the lenses in boxes :)
 
Do you have any plans to go full frame? If so then keep the 24-70.
 
I have 12-24 and 17-55, both produce excellent images, the only thing with the 17-55 is that I sometimes feel that it is a touch short, question is if you would miss the extra reach of the 24-70.
 
I don't think the 12-24 is in the same class as your 24-70 or the 17-55. I had one for a while but is had bad CA and just wasn't sharp enough for me. The 17-55 is a fab lens but it's DX. If I was you I'd stick with what you have - maybe add a wide prime if you can afford it.
 
I'd stick with the 24-70.
Who knows, you may opt to go FX one day and the 24-70 will suit that.
 
I like my 17-55, great lens but am selling mine purely because I often need that extra reach, and rarely go below 24. If it was me I would keep the 24-70 just for the range, funds dont allow for that which is why i got the Tamron 28-75 2.8, and when I sell the nikon plan to get a 2nd hand sigma 10-20 for occasions when I need wide.
 
I like my 17-55, great lens but am selling mine purely because I often need that extra reach, and rarely go below 24. If it was me I would keep the 24-70 just for the range, funds dont allow for that which is why i got the Tamron 28-75 2.8, and when I sell the nikon plan to get a 2nd hand sigma 10-20 for occasions when I need wide.

any views or comments on the Tamron 28-75 2.8?
which version is it?
 
I think the majority of you have told me what I guess I already knew but needed to be sure on.
I will be keeping the 24-70 for now but although you all say keep it if I am going FX, thing is I will probably have to sell it if I get the D3 in April to help fund, wish I could afford the kit I would like but simply cant.

Thanks for your help much appreciated
Tony
 
The 24-70 is gorgeous even on a DX body! Keep it!!!!
 
Do you have any plans to go full frame? If so then keep the 24-70.

i agreee


i have a dx body and building my collection of lenses, then may move onto a d700 i really wanna get one...

i am too in the postion of looking at a wide angle lens, just save up and get what you want, i am currently looking at a tokina 116 but it is only a dx lens but for the price can go wrong its a steal
 
I love my 24-70, it is an awesome lens and I would be loathed to part with it, espcially for DX lenses which are almost useless when you go to FX.

Save up for the 12-24 F2.8 if you need a brillant wide lens or trade your body for a D700.

You will only regret getting rid of the 24-70.
 
My vote goes with keeping the 24-70mm. It's hopefully going to be one of my next lenses. I've got a Sigma 10-20mm, so I'm sorted for ultrawide, but if I ever go full frame then I only have to change this lens and not the midrange zoom as well.
 
Back
Top