NAS Query : 17-55 f/2.8 or 28-70 f/2.8 "Beast" [Archive]

fidel_mercado

10-31-2006, 09:23 AM

I'm not a Nikon user but I would go for the 17-55. I'm assuming you are using a crop-factor camera so the long end will be around 70-80mm; I think this is the ideal focal length for portraits. The 17mm would indeed make a difference in landscapes as compared to 28mm as well.

jerrytieng

10-31-2006, 09:54 AM

17-55 better for landscapes and "environmental" portraiture. 28-70 more for "traditional" portraiture. Get the first one muna. :)

Marton_Benitez

10-31-2006, 09:56 AM

For landscapes i'd definitely pick the 17-55. The 28-70 on a digital camera won't be as great as the 17-55 due to the crop factor. I usually feel my 28-70 not being wide enough, but I love it for portraits and just everyday stuff :)

dave_deluria

10-31-2006, 10:15 AM

I own a 17-55. In as much as I love the wide angle capability, I feel it's a tad short for portraiture as I tend to favor close up shots. I'd probably spring for a 28-70, but after a 70-200.

Now I wish Nikon had a 70-200 F4.

Niko Villegas

10-31-2006, 10:24 AM

i go for the 17-55 . . . no doubt . . . sulit na sulit . . . :)

john_palafox

10-31-2006, 10:43 AM

You can find many discussions in the net comparing both lenses. But in the end everyone would agree that they are both great lenses.

I feel that the 17-55 is a better walkaround focal length and definitely the better focal length for landscapes between the two. However, if you are really serious about landscapes the 17mm might not be to wide in my opinion.

The 28-70's focal length on the other hand covers much of the 35mm camera's traditional focal length for portraiture -- 80 to 105mm.

nolan_empalmado

10-31-2006, 11:21 AM

given your photography interests, i think you should get the 28-70. the 17-55 will leave you short on the tele end for portraits and short on the wide end for landscapes. on the other hand the 28-70 gets you the perfect portrait range. i would suggest that you get the beast, drop the 17-55 in favor of the 12-24. if you only get the 28-70 then at least one of your interests is well covered.

zandy_marantal

10-31-2006, 11:34 AM

Have both but the 28-70 gets rarely used.

As they say, you can always move forward but you can't always step back.

The 17-55 dx being smaller and lighter, is a bonus.

manny_illana

10-31-2006, 01:14 PM

thanks for all your comments and suggestions. the lenses listed does favo?r one over the other interests i had in mind thus making the choice difficult. the other difficulty is that the local stores don't have both on stock for testing. anybody here willing to help me out for a lens test? would really appreciate it. big thanks in advance. i live in the makati area.

nolan_empalmado

10-31-2006, 01:27 PM

you can try out my 28-70 if you want. i work in the makati area.

tj_parpan

10-31-2006, 01:31 PM

Medyo OT, but maybe we can also do "trying on for size" lens test EB? Sonny wanted to check out my Tamron 90mm Macro and Dodie wanted to try my 1.4x TC on his 80-200. I can bring my 17-55. :)

Marton_Benitez

10-31-2006, 01:42 PM

TJ, Im game for it just to meet up and have fun and i want to play around with an 85 1.4 hehe :)

manny_illana

10-31-2006, 02:41 PM

not necessarily OT TJ as it works out well for me if you and nolan can bring both your lenses for me to test... with the rest doing the same as well. friday night?

Gil Penaflorida

10-31-2006, 03:00 PM

I also do landscape and portraiture with the latter as my more frequent usage. I don't have the 17-55 but i do use the 28-70 for about 70% of my shots even for landscape. Wide angle is an exciting lens but I just find it a bit difficult at times to look for good foreground image where the effect of wide angle seems to thrive. I do like isolating details in landscape and there are times that I use 135 (Manual) and 180 AF-D more than my Tokina 12-24 and 28-70. Going back to my vote, I would prefer the 28-70 for my style of shooting. It is undeniable that the Beast is a great sharp contrasty lens and in the future when Nikon have the FF DSLR, this lens wil be an outstanding part of my arsenal. I would also advise to get the 85 1.4 for portraiture though a bit long for studio use but invaluable in available light shoots. And btw, the 85 1.4 is one of the bokeh king in the Nikon line-up. The 17-35 2.8 is another great lens for landscape if you are fond of wide angle and almost distortion free. The choices are many but your shooting style will finally determine the appropriate lens for you but beware of NAS it's incurable and highly contagious.

Earl Gonzalez

10-31-2006, 03:02 PM

Carlo R. Lopez

10-31-2006, 03:10 PM

Manny i was in the same boat as you. i have researched for months and in the end i chose the 17-55 over the beast. i do not regret it at al. the 17-55 is my walk around lens and use it 95% of the time. i use it for street photography and landscapes and also for portraiture. i wil post my portrait shots i took in the cebu fashion shoot soon.

i do not miss the 55-70 range as i can always attain those precious mms by using my legs to zoom and move forward. you can always crop for tighter shots. best you try it for yourself and get the feel. you can try my 17-55 im in makati.

@marton you are more than welcome to test my 85mm 1.4, 28mm 1.4 or even the noct if you like. just holler. id be more than happy to fuel your lens lust:)

Carlo R. Lopez

10-31-2006, 03:15 PM

manny i was in the same boat as you. i researched for months in th end i favored the 17-55 over the beast, since i made that decision i have not regretted it at all. this is my most used lens in my arsenal and accounts for 90% of my usage. great for landscapes, interiors and even portraiture. i use it all the time. will post portarait shots from my cebu photoshoot soon.

you can always crop in pp to get a tighter shot. your more than welcome to give my unit a try.

@marton your more than welcome to try my 85 1.4, 28 1.4, 65mm .75 etc etc. always a pleasure to fan your lens lust

manny_illana

10-31-2006, 10:16 PM

big thanks to everyone for helping out an enthusiast. ditto on all points for both lenses.
@gil... thanks for the big point on NAS.
frankly, i'd be happy with just the 12-24 f/4, 17-55 f/2.8 or 28-70 f/2.8 and either the 70-200 f/2.8 VR or 80-200 f/2.8.
@carlo/nolan, you got pm.

John Edward Taca

10-31-2006, 10:30 PM

i have a 10-22, a 17-85IS and a 24-70. i almost never remove my 24-70 from my cam. i do alot of portraits tho. dont think you need a 2.8 for landscape as much as you need it for portrait. just my personal exp =)

tj_parpan

11-01-2006, 12:34 AM

Manny, I'm OK for Friday from 6pm to 730pm. Have to leave for a dinner though. Taste of Salcedo or Starbucks Alfaro?

Marton_Benitez

11-01-2006, 01:29 AM

@Carlo, Thanks bro! :) But the 85 1.4, yung 28 1.4 is out of my range haha :) baby steps hehe

Earl Gonzalez

11-01-2006, 08:00 AM

@Carlo, Thanks bro! :) But the 85 1.4, yung 28 1.4 is out of my range haha :) baby steps hehe

Testing the 85 haaaaaaaaa?!?! :Grin: It will be an eye-openner for you Bro.!

Carlo R. Lopez

11-01-2006, 11:04 AM

Testing the 85 haaaaaaaaa?!?! :Grin: It will be an eye-openner for you Bro.!

last couple of times i offered it to him he just wanted to look:) now its try whats next?

rosalie_gomez

11-01-2006, 11:20 AM

last couple of times i offered it to him he just wanted to look:) now its try whats next?

Hahaha! Trying to avoid having a feel of the lens... maybe he's ready to buy already?!? :D

Marton_Benitez

11-01-2006, 01:33 PM

Hahaha! Trying to avoid having a feel of the lens... maybe he's ready to buy already?!? :D

Haha not quite :D Perhaps by christmas time :Grin:

rosalie_gomez

11-01-2006, 02:37 PM

Haha not quite :D Perhaps by christmas time :Grin:

That's not too far, Marton!!! Less than 2 months... :Grin:

Earl Gonzalez

11-01-2006, 04:09 PM

last couple of times i offered it to him he just wanted to look:) now its try whats next?

That lens will give him a rush, then a headache... then the aching wallet syndrome follows... :D hehehehehehe

Niko Villegas

11-01-2006, 05:06 PM

That lens will give him a rush, then a headache... then the aching wallet syndrome follows... :D hehehehehehe

namention mo na ang symptoms . . . Diagnosis . . . NAS hihihihihi :D

manny_illana

11-01-2006, 07:21 PM

@tj
starbucks alfaro's fine with me. meet u up at 6! thanks dude.
i can just try out the 28-70 @ columbia makati.

it seems i've just started a virus here.... an incurable NAS one... hahaha

Marton_Benitez

11-01-2006, 07:37 PM

it seems i've just started a virus here.... an incurable NAS one... hahaha

Don't worry :D It's been going on for ages :D hahaha

Carlo R. Lopez

11-01-2006, 09:54 PM

@tj
starbucks alfaro's fine with me. meet u up at 6! thanks dude.
i can just try out the 28-70 @ columbia makati.

it seems i've just started a virus here.... an incurable NAS one... hahaha

hey manny texted you this morning did you get it?

louie_lao

11-01-2006, 10:27 PM

Wow...lens trying?! This is going to be fun! :)

ricardo_li

11-01-2006, 11:35 PM

i myself would prefer the 28-70mm f/2.8

kentamayo

11-02-2006, 07:22 AM

Hmm. I've always been curious about these 2 lenses too, as well as the 85 1.4 and 28 1.8.... he he he he he hee :D

Lens tryout EB? I'm game!

Peace!

tj_parpan

11-02-2006, 07:41 AM

I'm confirmed to meet Manny tomorrow at Starbucks Alfaro at 6 until 7 or so. Who's game?

manny_illana

11-02-2006, 08:33 AM

Carlo R. Lopez

11-02-2006, 09:30 AM

@carlo.... sorry i didn't receive it. my cel bty died out yesterday am and i actually woke up late then. thanks. hope you can make it tomorrow Starbucsk Alfaro 6-7pm so i could then try out both lenses. do text me again please.
thanks guys.

cool sir no problem. tjs 17-55 copy is excellent. its the exact same copy i tried when i was deciding on the 17-55. was so impressed i got one several months after

tj_parpan

11-02-2006, 06:53 PM

Manny, something came up at work, I won't be able to meet up at 6. Sorry about that!

Marton_Benitez

11-02-2006, 07:53 PM

move it to next week! :D hehehe i have to attend a birthday party tom :)

AndrewTungBorlongan

11-03-2006, 01:45 AM

greetings!

if i want to practice in the field of portraiture and fashion photography, which of these two lens would be more suitable for my needs? :)

thanks!

borly

manny_illana

11-03-2006, 07:56 AM

@tj, no worries. next week will be fine.
@andrew, based on the replies to this thread, it seems either would do with the 28-70 with its added reach having a plus on the 17-55.
correct me if i'm mistaken peeps.

Niko Villegas

11-03-2006, 12:53 PM

but then again, the 17-55 can also do wonders, just like what Sir Manny Librodo did in one of his sets :)

Marton_Benitez

11-03-2006, 01:44 PM

but then again, the 17-55 can also do wonders, just like what Sir Manny Librodo did in one of his sets :)

Amen! :)

Borly, you really can't go wrong with both of them :) Its all really up to you and your shooting style :)

AndrewTungBorlongan

11-04-2006, 01:30 AM

thanks for the speedy reply niko, manny & ton :D

Earl Gonzalez

11-05-2006, 07:00 PM

greetings!

if i want to practice in the field of portraiture and fashion photography, which of these two lens would be more suitable for my needs? :)

thanks!

borly

28-70 f/2.8 :Grin: "Tapos na boxing..." Translation = No question about it...

AndrewTungBorlongan

11-05-2006, 08:48 PM

28-70 f/2.8 :Grin: "Tapos na boxing..." Translation = No question about it...

thanks bro! will start saving na i guess :)

Earl Gonzalez

11-05-2006, 09:38 PM

thanks bro! will start saving na i guess :)

Yup! Do that quick Bro.! :) You see the lens in my Avatar? That's the Beast! :Grin:

Marton_Benitez

11-05-2006, 09:49 PM

Yup! Do that quick Bro.! :) You see the lens in my Avatar? That's the Beast! :Grin:

A white beast! or light gray hehe :Grin: But you know what they say, Once you go black... You're gonna need a wheelchair! haha Just kidding.

Borly that light gray one is a rare one! :)

Earl Gonzalez

11-05-2006, 10:03 PM

A white beast! or light gray hehe :Grin: But you know what they say, Once you go black... You're gonna need a wheelchair! haha Just kidding.

Borly that light gray one is a rare one! :)

The lens has it's share of raised brows! :D hehehehehehehe...

john_javellana

11-05-2006, 10:10 PM

canon user here but if there's one lens that has made me wanna get a nikkon it's the 17-55 2.8.. panalo siya for me! :)

rosalie_gomez

11-05-2006, 11:57 PM

canon user here but if there's one lens that has made me wanna get a nikkon it's the 17-55 2.8.. panalo siya for me! :)

@John
Canon has released it's own 17-55 f/2.8 already, right? :)

john_javellana

11-06-2006, 12:49 AM

@John
Canon has released it's own 17-55 f/2.8 already, right? :)

yep! but iba yung sa nikon eh! from the way the lens is built to how sharp it is i was really impressed. it made me say to myself.. "nikon's not so bad after all..." juuust kiddin! :)