graeme_mitchell Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 I'm building up a nikon system as I slowly move to digital. I'm have a D100. My work is varied, but mainly people (wedding, portrait, etc.) I have a 17-35 and want to add another lens soon. Either 80-200 or 28-70. Which would you buy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b. edward sandifer Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 Wow! What a tough question. These zoom ranges are my two most often used 'people' lenses (I have the 35-70/2.8 and the 80-200/2.8). I couldn't imagine not having either of them. If it helps, I can describe how each is used and maybe you can consider your primary needs. The 35-70 is used more for portrait or posed situations. Persons within several feet, or at least on your side of the room. The 80-200 is a terrific photojournalism type of lens which allows intimate portraits from across the room. It works best for one or two persons as subjects, not groups. The magnification (especially with the D100) would prevent larger groups from being framed easily with this lens. As a wedding shooter, I think you might get more immediate use from the shorter zoom as a walking around or posing people lens. It would also be easier to use flash at this shorter distance with this lens instead of the big gun. And that reminds me... the 80-200/2.8 is a real big lens. Not much fun to walk around with for very long. It also gets a lot of attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 For wedding and portrait, the 28-70mm/f2.8 makes a lot of sense, especially since you already have the 17-35 to cover the wider end and are using a D100 with the "1.5x factor." The 28-70 is more like a normal to medium-tele on the D100, which should be great for portraits or a small group of people. The 80-200 becomes a fairly long lens on the D100. While that can be useful as well, I would get the 28-70 first and maybe the 70-200 VR later should VR be important to you (not to me) or pick up a used 80-200 AF-S at a lower cost when people upgrade to the VR. Of course, this picture can change if you switch to a full-35mm-frame camera (film or DSLR) in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nate_mertz Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 Definetly get the 80-200 AND then get a 50 1.4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leslie_cheung Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 28-70mm because of the 1.5 factor and the portrait/wedding usage though the 80-200mm would be better if you use film cameras. 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