Sell the 35L, 135L and 300/4L
Get a 100-400L and a 24-70L.
JeffreyG "my bits and pieces are all hard" More info | Nov 28, 2010 09:56 | #16 Sell the 35L, 135L and 300/4L My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/photos/jngirbach/sets/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JelleVerherstraeten Goldmember 2,440 posts Likes: 1 Joined Dec 2008 Location: Antwerp, Belgium More info | Nov 28, 2010 10:37 | #17 |
RPCrowe Cream of the Crop More info | I seldom get rid of lenses... See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug.com/
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 28, 2010 14:20 | #19 sierra trekker wrote in post #11357784 You need a 50 f1.2..............everyone with a ff camera should have a "normal" lens. I use mine for over 80% of my shots. Depending upon what you use the 35 and 135 for, I might think about dumping them and getting a 70-200 f2.8 IS II. The 50 can easily take the place of the 35 with a little bit of footwork and the 135, although a great lens is somewhat of a singular use lens. In the end its all about what you use the lenses for, not having an arsenal that covers all of the focal lengths.
Nikon D850 l Nikon 28 1.4E l Nikon 50 1.8 g l Nikon 24-120 F4 l Tamron 100-400 l
LOG IN TO REPLY |
riverdog1 Senior Member 335 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2010 Location: East Central IL More info | Nov 28, 2010 17:00 | #20 skater911 wrote in post #11356285 I am really starting to get into landscape, but I also really like wildlife as well. maybe drop the 135L and 300 and get the new 70-300L Thought about this one too, but since it was so new I hadn't heard much about it and it is just a tad too short I think. The 300/4 has a short MFD making it great for butterflies, dragonflies etc. If you are getting more interested in wildlife you may find this option of shooting a perched bird then getting close on an insect for example, to be a great advantage of this lens.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
plasticmotif Goldmember 3,174 posts Likes: 2 Joined Sep 2008 Location: Tennessee More info | Nov 28, 2010 17:53 | #21 17-40, 35L, 100 macro and 100-400 would be a nice consolidated kit for you. Mac P.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
sierratrekker Mostly Lurking 10 posts Joined Jan 2007 More info | Nov 28, 2010 23:31 | #22 Would you say (focal length aside) the 50 1.2 is a better lens than the 35L? I have heard the issues with softness and focus shift, but have never used one before. Put it this way, I've had jsut one copy of a 50 1.2 whereas I've purchased and sold at least and maybe three copies of the 35L. To me it is just a better all around lens, particularly of a FF camera. I also don't think that the 85 would be a good walk-around lens. I have an 85L and it is more of a specialty lens...........and it is very special. On the 50 1.2, I never experienced the so called problems the various forums are full of. Then again I'm not much of a pixel peeper and all of the fucusing errors that I have experienced were user error.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
hhuy888 Goldmember 1,002 posts Likes: 17 Joined Mar 2010 More info | Nov 29, 2010 00:44 | #23 Your list is not even long to consolidate, that is just me. But everyone is different and maybe you are lucky that you don't have the lens collecting obsession like many of us. hhuy
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jannie Goldmember 4,936 posts Joined Jan 2008 More info | Nov 29, 2010 00:57 | #24 Why do I not see anything in the way of a list of gear in his signature, do I have something set wrong, Ms.Jannie
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is ANebinger 1252 guests, 146 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||