If I'm consdering buying the DA*16-50 and 50-135, another alternative i will look at is Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and Tamron 70-200 f/2.8.
And save the money and go for a holiday to shoot! Hehe!
If I'm consdering buying the DA*16-50 and 50-135, another alternative i will look at is Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and Tamron 70-200 f/2.8.
And save the money and go for a holiday to shoot! Hehe!
And lose the WR features along with DA* bragging rights.. lol
WR is a worthy consideration
Greg0222 said:I chose 16 50, plus 60 250. It's a hard decision between 50 135 and the 60 250, though.
DA*16-50 and 50-135 completes the focal length needs on APS-C for most people.
edutilos- said:No UWA! :think:
Ya right.... Look for one now.. Thinking to wait for the da12-35mm lol
But it jus rumors and dunnno when it will release
No UWA! :think:
OT ; I wonder if there is a WR wide angle prime or zoom? say 10mm F2.4 or thereabout?
OT ; I wonder if there is a WR wide angle prime or zoom? say 10mm F2.4 or thereabout?
I would prefer a prime setup - DA15, DA21, FA31/DA35, FA43/FA50 and a DA70/FA77. I can then end it with some kind of a 135prime or >=100mm macro prime.
The DA* 16-50 has a lot of good alternatives, which are also all much cheaper, so its a tough choice.
However the DA* 50-135 is really outstanding. The only thing which comes close is the Sigma 50-150 f2.8, but thats incredibly hard to find. The tamron/sigma 70-200 f2.8 are very good also but they are not really direct alternatives.
eh bro,, actually i am really planning on that before i saw your post..
just got the FA 31 silver with a 50-135mm
and if wan really longer shot shd be aiming 200/300 prime
waiting for cash flow to fill in the empty prime at the low focal length.. not sure is it good
my current set up is a 12-24, FA35, 43 and 50-135 and it suited almost 99% of my needs altho sometimes i wish i have a 200mm but i will not lose sleep over the missing 200mm