Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 40 of 40

Thread: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

  1. #21
    Senior Member oceanpriest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Ghim Moh
    Posts
    3,453

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    8-16, 17-50, 55-300? no overlapping

  2. #22

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by oceanpriest View Post
    8-16, 17-50, 55-300? no overlapping
    haha.. i have a 17-50 more to complete the this set

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,984

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFuhrer View Post
    So the general consensus here is to get a general-purpose 1770, or get an UWA lens like a 12-24 or 10-20/3.5 to compliment the 2875.

    And here's yet another dilemma . Get 1770 or 1750, and I can still manage to purchase another lens: a 55-300 (for street-candid-photography, in preparation for summer ). Since my longest reach is 75mm (on the Tammy), I think the 55-300 is a good step to take before considering to buy a 50-135*/2.8 or 70-200/2.8.

    If I get the 10-20, well... That's all I can get. Two lens, or one? :P

    Lastly, thank you for all the great replies!
    The addition of a 55-300 changes things a bit. I think both options are good, so it's really up to you to assess if the wide end or the long end is going to be more important to you. The 17-50 + 55-300 combo will definitely give you the most flexibility, and 17 may very well be wide enough for you if you're only an occasional wide angle shooter. It's also a very nice 2 lens setup for travelling. But if you get smitten by the wide angle bug, you're going to end up wanting a real UWA eventually.
    My photos - see just some or all of it =)

  4. #24
    Member TheFuhrer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gengh View Post
    The addition of a 55-300 changes things a bit. I think both options are good, so it's really up to you to assess if the wide end or the long end is going to be more important to you. The 17-50 + 55-300 combo will definitely give you the most flexibility, and 17 may very well be wide enough for you if you're only an occasional wide angle shooter. It's also a very nice 2 lens setup for travelling. But if you get smitten by the wide angle bug, you're going to end up wanting a real UWA eventually.
    If I get infected by the (U)WA bug, than most probably I'll be going to get 10-20. So the question is: will it be wiser to save up for 10-20 than getting a 17-50? I really, really, cannot justify to myself in purchasing a 17-50 because it's FL is already covered by the kit lens, despite the fact that the 17-50 is faster. (My real honest opinion, so please don't get offended, oh 17-50(*)/2.8 users; heck, I may even get a 17-50 in the future!)

    EDIT: Re-reading pinholecam's reply (and several other users' replies), I finally am convinced to get a UWA since the 28-75 is

    Quote Originally Posted by pinholecam View Post
    ... a duplication of what you already have from 28mm-50mm.
    What do you guys think of 10-20 + 28-75 + 55-300? A better combination? Though for travel I think I'll bring along the first two lens.

    Lastly, would you go for the 10-20/4-5.6 or 10-20/3.5?
    Last edited by TheFuhrer; 24th March 2011 at 02:10 AM.
    Qoo?

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,984

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFuhrer View Post
    What do you guys think of 10-20 + 28-75 + 55-300? A better combination? Though for travel I think I'll bring along the first two lens.

    Lastly, would you go for the 10-20/4-5.6 or 10-20/3.5?
    This is the ideal combo in your case. So with budget concerns, you'll have to get the 10-20 first, and the 55-300 after saving up more? No experience with the 10-20s, so can't comment on which is better.
    My photos - see just some or all of it =)

  6. #26
    Member TheFuhrer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gengh View Post
    This is the ideal combo in your case. So with budget concerns, you'll have to get the 10-20 first, and the 55-300 after saving up more? No experience with the 10-20s, so can't comment on which is better.
    I was thinking of getting the 55-300 first, since this is the most 'stable' solution, given the FL I already have covered.

    But the thing about the 10-20/3.5 is the price. It really cost a bomb, when compared to 17-50, 17-70 and even the 10-20/3.5-5.6. In short, it's quite a risky move, because I'm not even sure if UWA is my 'thing'. I don't have friends who own a UWA lens (most of them are on kit or 35/50 prime), so I cannot feel - first hand - a UWA perspective.

    Thinking again while I was typing this reply, I could...

    Get a 1770/2.8-4 (and pretend it's a DA 17-70/4, i.e. set it at f4 across the range)? Since the 17-50 is quite redundant because the 28-50 FL is already covered by the 28-75, and like what many have advised, get a 17-70 and use it as a general lens (so this one lens for travel). Effectively, this makes the 28-75... Redundant?

    That's 17-70, 28-75, 55-300. Hmm... An odd Combination. I like the previous one better; 10-20, 28-75, 55-300. And I guess most feel the same way.

    I know, I have to make a decision. A decision to spend more and risk not liking UWA, or get an very strange combination. Already I have 2 duplicates within the 28-75 range, a M 50/1.7 and a 35/2.4 DA L. Hmmm.

    (Sorry for thinking out loud and making you guys read what is going on in my mind. But I hope in doing so will benefit others who may/will face the same situation as I am in right now.)
    Last edited by TheFuhrer; 24th March 2011 at 03:13 AM.
    Qoo?

  7. #27

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    It'll be pretty troublesome if u're getting the sigma 10-20, there's quite a high percentage of samples that comes with OOF (out of focus), that is if u can find 1 ready stock.
    And if it's OOF, you'll have to bring it to sigma service center which i heard is not fun to deal with.
    I, personally am a user of the sigma 8-16. So far haven't heard anything from the users, i guess sigma leveled up their QC. But that will cost more and no filters can be used.

    Still, UWA is very fun to have, it creates a whole new perspective where you cant normally see with naked eyes.
    If price matters a lot to you, just get the sigma 10-20 f4-5.6, there's no point spending more for the f3.5, which is more exp, needs larger filters, and landscapes usually requires small apertures anyways.

  8. #28

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    how about selling the 28-75 to get both the 17-50 and either DA 55-300 or tamron 70-200?

    I think the reason for your strange combination is your 28-75 as its focal length is meant for full frame..a tamron 17-50 + tamron 70-200 would give you almost the coverage you want except for the extreme wide and tele end..

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,984

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Couple of questions:

    1. Do you have the 18-55 kit lens or have at least used it before? If you have, was 18mm wide enough for you, or did you frequently wish it was wider? If you do, then a UWA will not really be a 'risk'. If you've never used the kit lens before, you could consider picking one up 2nd hand, won't cost you much.

    2. When you shoot with the 28-75, do you frequently shoot wide open? If you don't, then you could consider getting the 17-70 and selling away the 28-75. Unless the bokeh or other non-quantifiable qualities of the 28-75 makes it clearly better for portraits, you'll have to judge that yourself. Or better, get the 17-70, sell the 28-75, and save up to get the DA70 for portraits!

    Either way, the 55-300 is still a good addition.
    My photos - see just some or all of it =)

  10. #30
    Member TheFuhrer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by evolutioner View Post
    It'll be pretty troublesome if u're getting the sigma 10-20, there's quite a high percentage of samples that comes with OOF (out of focus), that is if u can find 1 ready stock.
    Yikes. Scary story. But on a personal note, I don't really like the exterior coatings on Sigma lenses. That is why I got a 28-75 instead of the 24-70. But if I'm getting a 17-70, I guess I have to live with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamakasi View Post
    how about selling the 28-75 to get both the 17-50 and either DA 55-300 or tamron 70-200?
    I am really reluctant to sell off my 28-75, because I still think it's the perfect portrait lens for me. Of course, prime lens (77, 70, 55, 50, etc) take better portraits, but until I can afford such a lens (I'm still a student after all), I'll stick to this 28-75.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gengh View Post
    1. Do you have the 18-55 kit lens or have at least used it before?
    Yeah, I still do have my kit lens. Not to sound arrogant, but I seldom equip it because I find it too wide and slow. That's why I am reluctant to move to 10-20.

    With the FL limitation of 28mm, sometimes I just take several steps back to take group photos, but we can't really do that for landscape. Though panorama is a (temporary) solution, like what yeohth suggested.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gengh View Post
    2. When you shoot with the 28-75, do you frequently shoot wide open?
    Most of the time wide open. Only in some situations I'll stop it down.


    Back when I got the 2875, I was really sure I didn't really need <28mm. But since I want to travel - and having previously faced first hand the limitation of 28mm while on Manchester stadium tour - my requirement changed.

    On the other hand I could get the 17-70, and use it as my travel lens. The 28-75 will than be primarily for portraits (or 'photoshoots' ).

    Okay, so now I'm leaning towards getting a 17-70, but still holding on to the 28-75. In a perfect world that I pictured myself being in, I will sell 17-70 and 28-75, and get FA77, *17-50 and *50-135. *pop* There goes the dream bubble. :P
    Last edited by TheFuhrer; 25th March 2011 at 03:58 AM.
    Qoo?

  11. #31

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFuhrer View Post
    Yeah, I still do have my kit lens. Not to sound arrogant, but I seldom equip it because I find it too wide and slow. That's why I am reluctant to move to 10-20.
    since u shoot wide open with the 28-75 most of the time, is F4.5 at 70mm fast enough for you? bearing in mind that you probably have to step down for optimum sharpness.

  12. #32

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFuhrer View Post
    Most of the time wide open. Only in some situations I'll stop it down.


    Back when I got the 2875, I was really sure I didn't really need <28mm. But since I want to travel - and having previously faced first hand the limitation of 28mm while on Manchester stadium tour - my requirement changed.

    On the other hand I could get the 17-70, and use it as my travel lens. The 28-75 will than be primarily for portraits (or 'photoshoots' ).

    Okay, so now I'm leaning towards getting a 17-70, but still holding on to the 28-75. In a perfect world that I pictured myself being in, I will sell 17-70 and 28-75, and get FA77, *17-50 and *50-135. *pop* There goes the dream bubble. :P
    Dont want to sound harsh, but I'd still recommend you get a 10-20 or 12-24.
    28mm did not work for Manchester Staduim, 17mm won't as well.
    Neither will it work in Notre Dame, St. Martin in the Fields, TianAnMen, etc

    If you want to make the best of your camera and get satisfaction of good shots (as well as the occasional pat on the back from people). You need to work for it. Yes, that means slowing down, taking the time to change the lens and using the appropreate focal length to execute the composition in mind.
    Stop down the aperture as well. Benefit from the lens sharpness stopped down. The Tamron 28-75/2.8 is already good wide open. IMHO, its even better stopped down 0.3 stops to 1 stop. For example, at f3.2, you actually get better sharpness than f2.8, while not sacrificing much in terms of speed and DOF.
    Last edited by pinholecam; 25th March 2011 at 10:22 AM.

  13. #33

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFuhrer View Post
    On the other hand I could get the 17-70, and use it as my travel lens. The 28-75 will than be primarily for portraits (or 'photoshoots' ).
    From my view , no point to keep both lens . U will end up only using either lens and keep the another

    I will go with the most suggestion here.

    Get a 10-20 and keep yr 28-75mm
    My Flickr ->Flickr

  14. #34

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Really sounds like you just need a UWA to complement your 28-75mm. Usual suspects are 10-20mm, 12-24mm or 8-16mm.
    I like my DA15mm, but that might not be wide enough in certain cases.

  15. #35

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Hi Bro, U will be paying about SGD$558 for the lens alone if you are buying from the UK online webstore.
    U will still need to factor in the delivery charges and the Singapore GST tax charges. Total cost will probably near or more expensive that what you can get in Singapore. U may want to reconsider your options again.

  16. #36

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by xtunbox View Post
    Hi Bro, U will be paying about SGD$558 for the lens alone if you are buying from the UK online webstore.
    U will still need to factor in the delivery charges and the Singapore GST tax charges. Total cost will probably near or more expensive that what you can get in Singapore. U may want to reconsider your options again.
    TS is currently in UK lah...

  17. #37

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by detritus View Post
    TS is currently in UK lah...
    I read through this thread again and found only one clue ~"summer".

  18. #38
    Senior Member oceanpriest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Ghim Moh
    Posts
    3,453

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Quote Originally Posted by xtunbox View Post
    I read through this thread again and found only one clue ~"summer".
    2nd clue

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFuhrer View Post
    Being a student and a Pentax user here in the UK, is not quite a good combination. Especially since some Pentax lens and most Sigma/Tamron lens are slightly cheaper here.

  19. #39

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?


    hiaz... my eyes are doing selective reading. Or am i getting old.
    Last edited by xtunbox; 25th March 2011 at 05:12 PM.

  20. #40
    Member TheFuhrer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: Dilemma - 1750 or 1770?

    Okay. I've made up my mind.

    *drum rolls* :P

    I'll get the 10-20. Guess I need to do more saving up!

    Cheers to all for your wonderful and insightful replies. Appreciate it lots.
    Qoo?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •