should a newbie get this AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED.

[iZ1d]

hi,

i'm a newbie here gettin a D70 really soon. just the body at $1365 i think at AP. i'm considerin gettin an AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED. with a 2x tele-convertor. been readin & it seems that this is a good lens. i luv 2 take portrait, nature, sports may soon, i guess i like 2 take loads of everythin... pls advice me. will this be enough for a starter... :dunno:

and will the 2x tele-convertor affect the lens f/2.8 in any way? :dunno:

and can i use the tele-convertor in the 1st place since its a DX lens? :dunno:



thanks guys...

 

[showtime]

if you really take loads of EVERYTHING, then this lens combination is not enough... even with eh teleconverter... care to elaborate what everything means?

your max apperture of f2.8 will be multiplied by 2 times resulting in f5.6 when use the TC

btw, this is a very expensive "starter" lens...

 

[espn]

Urm INW, 17-55 cannot use TC. Neither can the 17-35, 28-70. Nor even the 24-120VR.

The 70-200/80-200 can.

I'm currently testing the 17-55 DX that Dennis has graciously loaned me.


I'm migrating very soon liao don't intend to return it :bsmilie:

 

[Virgo]

Woah! Newbie getting very expensive lens leh...

Buy!!! Buy!!! Buy!!!

 

[Witness]

if u like sports ... then prob u need a 70-200 VR...hehe..

 

[KNIGHT ONG]

It is a very good lens, and if you can afford I see why not ?

 

[yanyewkay]

talking about which.. is it wise to buy a AF-S VR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED a general purpose (walk around) lens? cos i don't see much ppl talking about it.

 

[espn]

Yes, it's fine for a walk around len for it's weight and features. The 24-120VR is very useful

 

[iZ1d]

thanks guys for the enlightenment...

but the AF-S VR 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED is not f/2.8... sigh...

i really want a gud lens around mid range, if i get the AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED, i will not b able 2 get other lens 4 quite awhile...

 

[Dennis]

Wah small print some more, nevermind can just deposite $3k in my bank account can liow. I buy another one. :bsmilie:

Urm INW, 17-55 cannot use TC. Neither can the 17-35, 28-70. Nor even the 24-120VR.

The 70-200/80-200 can.

I'm currently testing the 17-55 DX that Dennis has graciously loaned me.


I'm migrating very soon liao don't intend to return it :bsmilie:

 

[glennyong]

u all are killing him with the vr lenses leh... can go for something more lighter ??

u might want to consider the 300mm f2.8 IF ED II AFS VR ~

hahahahahahhaa..

i am nt kidding....

hahhaha

but i am joking.. hahahahahahaaha

but seriously.. a 70-200mm f/2.8 will serve u well...

 

[Dennis]

OK seriously, to answer some of your question.
If you have the doh why not, 17-55mm is a good lens except for the weight but I guess if you want fast lens than no choice. Not sure if this will be good advise but the kit lens is pretty good and is useful if you want to go around light, can keep it although the range is duplicated. BTW it may be very dangerous to put a 2x converter on the lens due to the rear element not the DX. Next lens on your list should be the 70-200mm VR. No point in getting any others. This one can go with a converter without any problem.

hi,

i'm a newbie here gettin a D70 really soon. just the body at $1365 i think at AP. i'm considerin gettin an AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED. with a 2x tele-convertor. been readin & it seems that this is a good lens. i luv 2 take portrait, nature, sports may soon, i guess i like 2 take loads of everythin... pls advice me. will this be enough for a starter... :dunno:

and will the 2x tele-convertor affect the lens f/2.8 in any way? :dunno:

and can i use the tele-convertor in the 1st place since its a DX lens? :dunno:



thanks guys...