DSLRUsers.com

I have just sold the last of my film gear together with my 80-200 F/2.8, AF-D 24-120 and SB26 flash.

The cash has gone to LL hit list #1 member the 70-200VR ordered from Birddog yesterday and have a little cash left over. Wondering whether to keep saving to get my next LL hit list members the #2, 17-35 f/2.8 or #3 the 10.5 nikon OR buy the 1.7 teleconverter for the 70-200VR (as I already have the focal length covered that the teleconverter would taker care of the 80-400VR, albeit slower focus, I'm not convinced of the logic of this move but gee it would be great to have for the autofocus speed ) or get the 10.5 nikon.

Currently my photographic 'booty' consists of 12-24 AFS, 18-70 Kit lens, AFD 35-70 f/2.8, (soon to arrive ) AFS 70-200VR, 80-400VR, Sigma 150 F/2.8 HSM Macro, 55mm F/2.8 AI-S Micro Nikkor and PK-13 (that I hope i'll be able to use with the D200 when it arrives ).

Any thoughts from members or suggestions to help clear my thinking? but happily so

cheers
marco

If it were me...

...and I had a use for it...

I'd probably go with the 10.5 fisheye. You seem to have everything else pretty well covered.

With the 1.7x TC on the 70-200 I think you will loose some autofocus speed. Not sure if this will make it slower than the 80-400 though (have never used either)

The 17-35 is supposed to be a fantastic lens... but the 18-70 you currently have isn't exactly crap. If you need the 2.8 badly enough then I'd be considering this pretty strongly... otherwise the kit lens is good.

Just my two cents.

Paul

NikonUser wrote:With the 1.7x TC on the 70-200 I think you will loose some autofocus speed. Not sure if this will make it slower than the 80-400 though (have never used either)

No, not really! it's still fast as it is or with turbo intercooler.

The 17-35 is supposed to be a fantastic lens... but the 18-70 you currently have isn't exactly crap. If you need the 2.8 badly enough then I'd be considering this pretty strongly... otherwise the kit lens is good.

The 17-35 is another gem and should be one in your collection.

personally i think the TC 1.7C destroys the 70-200 i hardly use mine
firstly it softens the image and you loose about 2 stops

if thats the case why buy a f2.87 capable lens

it's better to use your 80-400VR as your monster zoom rather than compromising the speed of the 70-200vr

I would definately consider the 17-35 f2.8, the minimal focus distance of the 17-35 is very short which all makes for interestign image making

wendellt wrote:personally i think the TC 1.7C destroys the 70-200 i hardly use mine
firstly it softens the image and you loose about 2 stops

if thats the case why buy a f2.87 capable lens

it's better to use your 80-400VR as your monster zoom rather than compromising the speed of the 70-200vr

I would definately consider the 17-35 f2.8, the minimal focus distance of the 17-35 is very short which all makes for interestign image making

Wendell,
Do you know what are you talking about?

Whatsoever the 80-400VR is never faster than the 70-200VR with the TC.

And so many happy campers used the 70-200VR with TC 1.7 and none of them bashed it, except you, perhaps you don't know how to use it or it didn't suit your style.
Sell or eBay it!!!!!!!!

Thanks Paul. I think your right about the 18-70 it is a great little lens. Yeah it's tempting to get the 10.5 for fisheye type shots, I think i almost have the money now
Thanks Birddog and Wendell I think you are right the next one on my hit list just might be the 17-35. I'm really looking at gettting the range of good, fast quality lenses across the board. Who knows maybe one day the 300 or 400 f/2.8 AFS VR(24 - by the time I can afford one)
cheers
marco

birddog114 wrote:

wendellt wrote:personally i think the TC 1.7C destroys the 70-200 i hardly use mine
firstly it softens the image and you loose about 2 stops

if thats the case why buy a f2.87 capable lens

it's better to use your 80-400VR as your monster zoom rather than compromising the speed of the 70-200vr

I would definately consider the 17-35 f2.8, the minimal focus distance of the 17-35 is very short which all makes for interestign image making

Wendell,
Do you know what are you talking about?

Whatsoever the 80-400VR is never faster than the 70-200VR with the TC.

And so many happy campers used the 70-200VR with TC 1.7 and none of them bashed it, except you, perhaps you don't know how to use it or it didn't suit your style.
Sell or eBay it!!!!!!!!

your right birdy i will refrrain from knocking equipment that I find doesn't suit my needs
the tc 1.7 is very useful for other applications

Marco,

Get what you **need** before those items that you **want**. If the decision is hard then the need is for all of them... or none of them...

My choice would be the 17-35. It is a gem that will see a lot of use if you shoot in that range. Mine gets used every week... but on a film body.
Wide angle is covered nicely by the 12-24 and the 10.5 is getting very specialised.
I am not to keen on teleconvertors, but will admit that they have their place and that it is a damned sight cheaper (and lighter) to use one of these on a 70-200 than to go out and buy a 200-400. If it is spare change that you are looking to spend, then there are worse things to spend it on.

Considering that your 70-200 has only just been ordered, I would suggest holding off a little (leave the money in the bank) and make a decision based on **your needs**.

Lens lust is a horrible affliction!

Cheers

Thanks Matt good solid advice. I just love that 17-35. Yeah LL is horrible I think it's eroding what little common sense I have left

Better go and weed those gardens, just love weeding NOT Oh well I could be self centred and self serving and argue that it's 'brownie points' I'm collecting from my adorable wife OR that I can only think of 1, 975,000 other things i'd rather be doing so why not gardening
cheers
marco