timecut Posted November 13, 2002 Share Posted November 13, 2002 i already have a old af nikkor 20/f2.8 is it a good idea to sell it and get a new nikon 18-35 for travel shot? any suggustion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jose_francisco Posted November 13, 2002 Share Posted November 13, 2002 I have a 18-35 (excellent lens), I sold it and I buy a 20/2.8, more light and sharp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jose_francisco Posted November 13, 2002 Share Posted November 13, 2002 I had a 18-35 (excellent lens), I sold it and I buy a 20/2.8, more light and sharp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugh_sakols Posted November 13, 2002 Share Posted November 13, 2002 Tim, I was asking a similar question regarding my 24-50mm. I also own the 20mm 2.8 AFD. Scroll down to read my post which discusses the 18-35mm. It is interesting how many opinions are out there - everything from bad to excellent. Sounds to me like it is a fine lens but so is your 20mm. I think I will keep my 20mm and 24-50mm zoom. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted November 14, 2002 Share Posted November 14, 2002 Tim, a year ago I did essentially the same thing. I got the 17-35mm/f2.8 zoom and sold my 20mm/f2.8. During the brief period when I had both lenses, I did some tests and the 17-35 is every bit as good as the 20mm at all apertures. The zoom gives me a lot of flexability and I am very glad that I made the switch, as I started shooting at 17mm fairly often. Of course the 17-35 AF-S is very expensive and should be expected to be a great performer. Your mileage may vary and different people will have different preferences, but IMO it is an excellent move to replace the 20mm by a good zoom in the 18-35 range. And as far as I know the 18-35 is a fine lens, not as great as the 17-35 AF-S but only costs about 1/3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upscan Posted November 15, 2002 Share Posted November 15, 2002 The MTF data from Nikon indicates that the 18/35 is about as good as the 17/35. Differences are minor. What is not minor is the additional cost for the 17/35 and its humongous size and weight. There will be ergonomic considerations in the selection which also involve AF-S vs non AF-S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil_lupin Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 seriously, have a look at Sigma's 17-35 EX or even their 15-30 - they are ultra sharp and fast, and a fraction of the price of Nikon lenses. I've had fantastic results with my F80. Yes, I'm a biased Sigma fan, but the results speak for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now