prime lens question

Saying the 50mm 1.8 with a 2X and the 100mm 2.8 are "pretty much the same" would be like saying that Kirstie Alley and a Playboy centerfold are "pretty much the same".

Actually Jay, you seem the understand the situation at this point, so I'll just say that you'll love the 100mm 2.8 macro. Its a sharp fun lens. Your right on the money wanting that Tokina as well.

nightcat wrote in post #8225258
Saying the 50mm 1.8 with a 2X and the 100mm 2.8 are "pretty much the same" would be like saying that Kirstie Alley and a Playboy centerfold are "pretty much the same".

Actually Jay, you seem the understand the situation at this point, so I'll just say that you'll love the 100mm 2.8 macro. Its a sharp fun lens. Your right on the money wanting that Tokina as well.

Ok saying pretty much the same were the wrong words. Should of said 50mm with 2x will give me the same FL. as the 100mm.

was looking at the tam 17-50 but I see alot of mixed reviews. Guess it would be better than what I have. I do like to 70 300. I step up from the tamron 75 300 much much better.


Hear another question do must people try to cover all the focal length?

like should I get a 60mm to cover the gap or not that big of deal.

gaps are ok, and its not that big a deal.

The 100 f/2.8 macro is a great lens... very sharp. You can use it as a macro lens (1:1) as well as a great portrait lens! It's a very sharp lens (have I mentioned this yet )