Dunno wat to buy.

ninelives · 22nd April 2002

Minolta AF 17-35mm f/3.5 G

and

Minolta AF 28-70mm f/2.8 G

I already own a Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX APO RF and Tokina ATX 28-70mm AF Pro f2.6-2.8.

I intented to sell away the Tokina.

Maybe I should get 17-35. But i will lose out 35-50mm but it is not significant.

But then again, if I need 70mm, i need to bring the heavy sigma.
If I get 28-70mm F2.8 G , it will be much lighter.

munfai · 24th April 2002

recommendation:

1. 17-35mm G lens
2. 28-70mm (Tokina or Minolta G, whatever)
3. 80-200mm G lens

not really a fan of huge zooms, so...

otherwise if you insist on keeping your 50-500mm, then get a 17-35mm and a 24-50mm. heard that the minolta 24-50mm is excellent.

nhyone · 24th April 2002

Quote:

Originally posted by ninelives
I already own a Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX APO RF and Tokina ATX 28-70mm AF Pro f2.6-2.8.

What's wrong with the Tokina lens? And how sure are you that you will be satisfied with the Minolta equivalent?

ralphii82sg · 24th April 2002

Quote:

Originally posted by munfai
recommendation:

1. 17-35mm G lens
2. 28-70mm (Tokina or Minolta G, whatever)
3. 80-200mm G lens

not really a fan of huge zooms, so...

otherwise if you insist on keeping your 50-500mm, then get a 17-35mm and a 24-50mm. heard that the minolta 24-50mm is excellent.

think i saw the 24-50 f4 in prime ome time back...maybe can go there and take a look

rueyloon · 24th April 2002

ya man, what's wrong with the tokina lens ?

I think you should just get the wide angle.

ckiang · 24th April 2002

Get the 17-35 and keep your Tokina 28-70. Even if you intend to sell it, a combination like 17-35, 50-500 isn't that bad. You can make up for the difference between 35 and 50 by a bit of footwork.

Photographers like Sam Abell and other prime users uses 3 primes, 28, 50, 90. So should not be an issue.

Regards
CK

coolbytes · 24th April 2002

i've got a friend selling his 28-70mm for $1400 . not the same guy from the previous post ... interested can pm me

rueyloon · 24th April 2002

Quote:

Originally posted by ckiang
Get the 17-35 and keep your Tokina 28-70. Even if you intend to sell it, a combination like 17-35, 50-500 isn't that bad.

ckiang, have you seen his 50-500 ?? it is a big lens, it is practically useless for "normal" 50mm usage...

22nd April 2002	#1
ninelives Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: BB Posts: 2,622	Dunno wat to buy. Minolta AF 17-35mm f/3.5 G and Minolta AF 28-70mm f/2.8 G I already own a Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX APO RF and Tokina ATX 28-70mm AF Pro f2.6-2.8. I intented to sell away the Tokina. Maybe I should get 17-35. But i will lose out 35-50mm but it is not significant. But then again, if I need 70mm, i need to bring the heavy sigma. If I get 28-70mm F2.8 G , it will be much lighter. Last edited by ninelives; 22nd April 2002 at 11:27 PM.

24th April 2002	#5
rueyloon Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,539	ya man, what's wrong with the tokina lens ? I think you should just get the wide angle. __________________ 36frames Wedding Photography - http://www.36frames.com rueyloon - http://www.rueyloon.com

24th April 2002	#2
munfai Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 1,313	recommendation: 1. 17-35mm G lens 2. 28-70mm (Tokina or Minolta G, whatever) 3. 80-200mm G lens not really a fan of huge zooms, so... otherwise if you insist on keeping your 50-500mm, then get a 17-35mm and a 24-50mm. heard that the minolta 24-50mm is excellent.

24th April 2002	#6
ckiang Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 6,597	Get the 17-35 and keep your Tokina 28-70. Even if you intend to sell it, a combination like 17-35, 50-500 isn't that bad. You can make up for the difference between 35 and 50 by a bit of footwork. Photographers like Sam Abell and other prime users uses 3 primes, 28, 50, 90. So should not be an issue. Regards CK

24th April 2002	#7
coolbytes Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: North Posts: 66	i've got a friend selling his 28-70mm for $1400 . not the same guy from the previous post ... interested can pm me