17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8

jeorems · 12th June 2007

Just wanted to know which one of this amazing lenses would you go for and why. Tempted to buy either one for use on indoor and low light shooting. Thanks in advanced for the responses this thread would generate...

zac08 · 12th June 2007

Which do you need more? A wider angle or a closer one? Both are f2.8 lens and the only difference I would see would be that the 17-55 is a DX and would not be reccomended for usage on a film or full frame camera.

ihub88 · 12th June 2007

what you intent to shoot? what is your prefer range? if you know, then you will know what lens to buy already.

RG550R · 12th June 2007

wah! ur planning to buy another lens lah...??? U just bought 18-200mm VR now planning again to buy this 2 expensive lens... U probably earning a lot lah...

Originally Posted by jeorems

Just wanted to know which one of this amazing lenses would you go for and why. Tempted to buy either one for use on indoor and low light shooting. Thanks in advanced for the responses this thread would generate...

lsisaxon · 12th June 2007

Originally Posted by jeorems

Just wanted to know which one of this amazing lenses would you go for and why. Tempted to buy either one for use on indoor and low light shooting. Thanks in advanced for the responses this thread would generate...

DX or Film? The 17-55 is supposed to be the DX version of the reputed 28-70 for film because it gives a similar angle of view. If you've used 28-70 on film before, you'll appreciate the 17-55 on DX.

Peterpan00 · 12th June 2007

These are both great lens. But if you are going for sharpness, the 28-70 f2.8 is sharper. However the 17-55 f2.8 DX has a good range.

xziredmp · 12th June 2007

from what i know and see..

28-70...

jeorems · 12th June 2007

Originally Posted by RG550R

wah! ur planning to buy another lens lah...??? U just bought 18-200mm VR now planning again to buy this 2 expensive lens... U probably earning a lot lah...

just "PLANNING" and hopefully it would materialized...still saving up and would probably get it once I clear my debt bcoz of the 18-200

it would take some time to save and avail one of this lenses.

Anyway...from what I understand this 2 lenses are both awesome lenses. To be more clear...I planned to use it on indoor events. But I really don't know which one would perform better on indoor events. I am still new in photography so I am not really sure about what range would I normally shoot. Any advice to those who are shooting indoors...

For those who have used both I hope you can shed a light on this question. Are they the same in terms of AF?

Yatlapball · 13th June 2007

Depends on what kind of indoor events you are talking about still. Whether you have the room to move back or not.

If you have a nikon film body, or have plans/intentions to buy the rumoured new FF DSLR... I would recommend the 28-70

If not I think the 17-55 will serve you pretty well for most cases on the 1.5x crop bodies

It usually is easier to move closer to a subject than to step back. Especially if you're talking about indoor events like dinners where you don't have much room to position yourself.

jeorems · 13th June 2007

I see...that was a wonderful insight...so I guess the 17-55 would be a better choice if I would stay on the DSLR with 1.5x crop...the rumoured FF DSLR would I think cost a lot...so I guess I would have to stay on the 1.5x...thanks man...

Yatlapball · 13th June 2007

you can try this...

Bring your camera along to such events. You've got a huge range at your disposal with the 18-200. Play around with various focal lengths. See when you need to go wider than 28, do you have room to step back to get the group shot? Yes? No?

Try again at 55 and 70. Do you need that little bit more of reach? Or much much more reach?

This is one good thing about superzooms. heh. They can be a really useful tool to help you decide on your specialised lens purchases.

jeorems · 13th June 2007

hmmm...it is quite a clever decision man...i never thought of that...i am still such a newbie

... would definitely give it a try man...thanks a lot...

Yatlapball · 13th June 2007

heh you're welcome. me newbie too

Robin · 14th June 2007

definitely 28-70 for full frame......... else 17-55 is great for DX bodies

wildstallion · 14th June 2007

For many events I would say the 28 is just about wide enough, however, I find myself always wanting to go a touch wider. Id say go for the 17-55, especially if your not going to use film or FF in the near future.

Yatlapball · 14th June 2007

Yeah just about most events except one very crucial one. The hated pain in the behind mundane table shots for chinese wedding dinners.

Of course unless you are belong to the group say "I don't do table shots."

Eric Lee · 15th June 2007

Originally Posted by Yatlapball

Yeah just about most events except one very crucial one. The hated pain in the behind mundane table shots for chinese wedding dinners.

Of course unless you are belong to the group say "I don't do table shots."

Haha.. agreed... using the 28-70 on a non FF DSLR... i have a hard time shooting wedding dinners and ROM room... no place to move back..

But using the 17-55, try not to shoot at 17mm or compose with the people at the edges.. sure distorted at the edges..

lsisaxon · 18th June 2007

Originally Posted by Eric Lee

But using the 17-55, try not to shoot at 17mm or compose with the people at the edges.. sure distorted at the edges..

This one still not that bad lah.. 12-24 is terrible.

erictan8888 · 19th June 2007

would you considered the 17-35mm ?
this is legendary and even if FF comes, it will not be a problem...

whichever you get, you will most likely not sell it away if you are serious about photography... so might as well get one that will not have any problem for FF....
cause its a matter of time that FF price will come down...

Spectrum · 24th June 2007

What really concern me is the overall performance. Most 2nd hand 28-70mm (even look as new) got AF screeching problem. What about the 2nd hand 17-55mm? I have no idea for that. Anyone really try & tested those 2nd hand 17-55mm lens before? Do share if possible.

12th June 2007	#1
jeorems Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 455	17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 Just wanted to know which one of this amazing lenses would you go for and why. Tempted to buy either one for use on indoor and low light shooting. Thanks in advanced for the responses this thread would generate... __________________ Harmony Through Photography ::www.ericsonmatias.net::

12th June 2007	#2
zac08 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: East Posts: 10,953	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 Which do you need more? A wider angle or a closer one? Both are f2.8 lens and the only difference I would see would be that the 17-55 is a DX and would not be reccomended for usage on a film or full frame camera.

12th June 2007	#3
ihub88 Account Suspended Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 590	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 what you intent to shoot? what is your prefer range? if you know, then you will know what lens to buy already.

12th June 2007	#6
Peterpan00 Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 61	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 These are both great lens. But if you are going for sharpness, the 28-70 f2.8 is sharper. However the 17-55 f2.8 DX has a good range.

12th June 2007	#7
xziredmp Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Singapore Posts: 574	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 from what i know and see.. 28-70...

13th June 2007	#9
Yatlapball Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: In God's Top Ten Posts: 2,249	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 Depends on what kind of indoor events you are talking about still. Whether you have the room to move back or not. If you have a nikon film body, or have plans/intentions to buy the rumoured new FF DSLR... I would recommend the 28-70 If not I think the 17-55 will serve you pretty well for most cases on the 1.5x crop bodies It usually is easier to move closer to a subject than to step back. Especially if you're talking about indoor events like dinners where you don't have much room to position yourself. __________________ my PBase(new)

13th June 2007	#10
jeorems Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 455	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 I see...that was a wonderful insight...so I guess the 17-55 would be a better choice if I would stay on the DSLR with 1.5x crop...the rumoured FF DSLR would I think cost a lot...so I guess I would have to stay on the 1.5x...thanks man... __________________ Harmony Through Photography ::www.ericsonmatias.net::

13th June 2007	#11
Yatlapball Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: In God's Top Ten Posts: 2,249	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 you can try this... Bring your camera along to such events. You've got a huge range at your disposal with the 18-200. Play around with various focal lengths. See when you need to go wider than 28, do you have room to step back to get the group shot? Yes? No? Try again at 55 and 70. Do you need that little bit more of reach? Or much much more reach? This is one good thing about superzooms. heh. They can be a really useful tool to help you decide on your specialised lens purchases. __________________ my PBase(new)

13th June 2007	#12
jeorems Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 455	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 hmmm...it is quite a clever decision man...i never thought of that...i am still such a newbie ... would definitely give it a try man...thanks a lot... __________________ Harmony Through Photography ::www.ericsonmatias.net::

13th June 2007	#13
Yatlapball Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: In God's Top Ten Posts: 2,249	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 heh you're welcome. me newbie too __________________ my PBase(new)

14th June 2007	#14
Robin Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Tanah Merah Posts: 646	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 definitely 28-70 for full frame......... else 17-55 is great for DX bodies

14th June 2007	#15
wildstallion Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Clementi, Singapore Posts: 2,837	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 For many events I would say the 28 is just about wide enough, however, I find myself always wanting to go a touch wider. Id say go for the 17-55, especially if your not going to use film or FF in the near future.

14th June 2007	#16
Yatlapball Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: In God's Top Ten Posts: 2,249	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 Yeah just about most events except one very crucial one. The hated pain in the behind mundane table shots for chinese wedding dinners. Of course unless you are belong to the group say "I don't do table shots." __________________ my PBase(new)

19th June 2007	#19
erictan8888 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 2,223	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 would you considered the 17-35mm ? this is legendary and even if FF comes, it will not be a problem... whichever you get, you will most likely not sell it away if you are serious about photography... so might as well get one that will not have any problem for FF.... cause its a matter of time that FF price will come down...

24th June 2007	#20
Spectrum Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Here Posts: 3,685	Re: 17-55 f2.8 OR 28-70 f2.8 What really concern me is the overall performance. Most 2nd hand 28-70mm (even look as new) got AF screeching problem. What about the 2nd hand 17-55mm? I have no idea for that. Anyone really try & tested those 2nd hand 17-55mm lens before? Do share if possible.