24-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF AF-S instead of 50mm f1.8D and 35mm f2.0D [was 28-70mm f2.8]

[ant_nio_gomes]

<blockquote>

<p>why would i agree with that comment? the tokina 12-24 is great for landscape, but also for PJ applications and travel</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Eric, <br>

That's an easy one - you don't. You're free to consider that the 16-35 <em>is landscape oriented</em> and the Tokina is great for landscape <strong>but also </strong>travel, street and so on. I will not contest your opinion as I just made that alternative suggestion to a person that was considering a bigger full format lens (Nikon 24-70) to be used on a DX body, and not trying to make a point on a subject that depends so much on personal interests, present and future.<br>

I don't doubt your good experience with the lenses you indicated but I also use the 16-35 for more than landscape, as I considered as pointless to add that as a mid-range zoom I use a Nikon AF-D 35-70mm F:2.8 (yes, I know it's an old one), that I do prefer the 35 and 50mm for street or the 85mm F:1.4 for people, because that was not at stake to answer Peter's doubts.<br>

Regards,</p>

<p> </p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>antonio, i get what you're saying. i'm not saying the 16-35 isnt good for other things than landscape (on FX), i'm saying it doesnt make a whole lotta sense for a DX shooter. there are better UWA options for APS-C, mainly because 16mm isn't all that wide when you factor the 1.5x crop. IMO, the main reason for an FX shooter to consider the 16-35 is if you want to use ND grads or protection filters and/or can't afford the 14-24 and/or don't need the 2.8 of the 17-35. if i was going to recommend a DX option that started at 16, it would be the 16-85 VR.</p>

<p>i have the 24-70, but to me it's not a great walkaround/street lens, for the reasons others have mentioned. i also have the 15-30, which is a close equivalent to the 16-35, but i have yet to use that on a DX body. why? because the 12-24 and 17-50 are better options in that format IMO, especially for street. also the 15-30 is physically huge, much more so than the tokina 12-24.</p>

<p>if the OP wants something in the equivalent focal range as the 24-70 for DX for street portraits and walkarounds, my recommendation would be the tamron 28-75 for its compactness, inexpensiveness, and overall IQ.</p>