I have a loaner 70-300G which will suffice for now, for those times when I need a long zoom. I've found that in the 3-4 weeks I've had the D70s that most of my best shots are done in the range of the kit 18-70 lens. And furthermore, my very favourites of those shots have been done with the classic 50/1.8 - for whatever reason, I like primes. I find that the fixed FL forces me to think about my composition more, and the speed/weight of the primes compared to the zooms is great.
So I've been thinking about getting some wide-angle primes to go alongside the 50/1.8... My budget is modest (mortgage, overseas trip, wedding, etc!) so I'm really only considering the cheaper versions of lenses if more than one version exists (ie: 28/2.8 instead of 28/1.4)
In the current Nikkor lineup (I think), there's the 10.5FE, 14/2.8, 18/2.8, 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2. I'm not considering the first three as being too pricey for now. This leaves 20/24/28/35 for my affordable choices.
At first glance, I have two basic choices:
1) Get a 20 and a 35. This gives me 3 primes with 15mm between each. Equiv to 30 and 50
2) Go for a 24 or a 28 which would give me a nice FL for taking group shots and general WA photos.
Of course in a perfect world, I'd own them all... but it's hard as it is to differentiate "want" from "need"
I'm trying not to fall into the trap of believing that good photography must come from good equipment, but I WOULD like at least one more WA prime to add to the list (while saving up for a 12-24, 85/1.8, 105 Micro and 80-200 )
All you guys with extensive prime lens collections, if you had to pick (a) only one WA prime, or (b) only two WA primes, which would you select for the two questions, and why, taking into account price (this is sounding like an essay questions...)
I'll try to come to a mini-meet in Feb and test out a couple for size! In the meantime I might set my 18-70 to particular FLs and see how I like them! Any thoughts or recommendations appreciated....
