lulu_l

<p>This morning I was given as a gift a 17-55 and a 24-70 and I can keep either one and give the other one back. I just don't know which one to keep. I have a D90 right now but will either get a D300s or may get a D700.<br>

I shoot mostly kids and families outdoors. I also wanted it as a walk around lens. I had been using my sister's 17-55 and I liked it. After looking through a lot of the pictures, I found most of my shots around 55. I felt thought that at 55 it seemed a little soft sometimes...<br>

I know some people say if you're going to be using it on the D300 get a 17-55 and if you're going to be using it on a D700 get the 24-70. But what if I got the D300 (or another DX) would the 24-70 be a bad choice?<br>

I just don't know which one to keep. Thanks in advance for your help.</p>

 

<p>I really like the 17-55. On a side note, I haven't noticed any flare though and I read so much about it. Can someone tell me when exactly I would see flare? Is it only if I'm shooting into the sun? What about backlit subjects?</p>

<p >I was wondering if I have a 17-55 AFS F/2.8 and it is almost as sharp as a prime, why would I get a 50mm prime lens? I know the aperture on the 17-55 is sometimes not fast enough and the extra speed is handy when the available light is not good and I don't want to use flash. Are there other reasons? Would it be a bad idea to get the 50mm 1.4 (for portraits)? </p>

<p > </p>

<p >thanks.</p>

<p>I think I'm going to get the Nikon 17-55, I'm very excited. Is there any particular filter I should get? thanks.</p>

<p>The lens I have now that came as part of a kit is the 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6. I like the zoom but I don't like how the widest open it gets it 3.5 and I also don't like how the aperture gets smaller when I zoom. That's why I wanted to get a fixed aperture zoom lens. I also don't like the bokeh from this current lens.<br>

the AF performance mentioned above, with regard to prime lenses. Isn't the same true on the 17-55? Even if I was going to stop down the lens wouldn't it be side open when metering? Or are you saying that they are even wider open than the 17-55 (which is what I think you meant).</p>

<p>Thank you so much for the responses. I would not get it just for group photos I also wanted a good walk-around lens as well and thought it would be good for that purpose also. Would you recommend a different lens? I'm don't like the kit lens that came with my D90.<br>

also regarding the getting something in the 24mm or 30mm range. What would be the purpose as opposed to the 17-55? cost reasons or would I get something that I would not get with the 17-55?</p>

 

<p>Hello,<br>

I am thinking about getting the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 but want to make sure it will be good for shooting groups. I shoot groups mostly (around 4-10 people) as well as portraits. I'm either going to get the 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 for the portraits (probably the 1.4) . Won't I have to stop down a lot for the group photos using the 17-55? I'm thinking at 2.8 it would not be sharp for the whole group?<br>

thanks in advance,<br>

Leila</p>