Which lens to buy next?

[Daniellius]

Thanks Rurouni for the suggestion. It definitely challenge my POV on having a ZOOM lens with image quality as a top priority.

Teodesson: Not sure what you mean by seldom using f2.8 on the 17-50mm. Sinces its a fix aperture lens, isnt it f2.8 at all length?

16-80 CZ is definitely a winner over Tamron 17-50 f2.8.. The price and reviews tell it all. Not sure why f3.5-4.5 would beat a fixed f2.8 though. Did thought about 16-80CZ and 75-300/70-200 G to cover a reasonably good range. Just out of my budget though :nono:

As for Sigma 18-250 OS HSM, yea, my Nikon friends does recommend this.. but just aint confident with Sigma lens for SLT camera. Might as well wait for Tamron 18-270 PZD for a comparison.

 

[teodesson]

Teodesson: Not sure what you mean by seldom using f2.8 on the 17-50mm. Sinces its a fix aperture lens, isnt it f2.8 at all length?

I step down to get 'sharper' picture (although f2.8 is usable)

 

[chanalb]

Thank you all for the advice.

chanalb: i agree that 50 f1.8 is a fairly decent lens as i begin to learn how to get nice bokeh out of it. Just thought 35mm f1.8 having the filter diameter as my kit would save $$ where i could apply filters on both lenses. But nevertheless, its a small issue.
Wurdelak: Any idea how much faster is fast? 0.5s? 1 or 2s or higher? Maybe i should go rent from CRC the Sony 18-250mm to test out. I also did toy with the idea of 70/75-300m but the idea of carrying at least 2 lens and not having tripod atm just isnt appealing.

You don't need filters for the 50F1.8 and the 35F1.8 since the front element for both is 'sunk in' so you won't have to worry about it being scratch accidently. Also these are prime lens and using UV filters would be a waste as the IQ would be compromised. Other filters like ND and polarisers are more for landscape, which are not what these primes are meant for.

Because of the wide range, the 18-250 is not very fast when compared to 55-200 or 50F1.8 or even the 18-55. It is not suitable for fast shooting moving objects. But it does not focus hunt and the focusing is very accurate even in low light. So still objects are ok.

 

[Atarandas]

16-80 CZ is definitely a winner over Tamron 17-50 f2.8.. The price and reviews tell it all. Not sure why f3.5-4.5 would beat a fixed f2.8 though. Did thought about 16-80CZ and 75-300/70-200 G to cover a reasonably good range. Just out of my budget though :nono:

Well cz brand fetches a premium , then again, that doesnt imply 17-50 f2.8 is not good . And the iq improvement in the cz may be not significant to pay for the premium .

If you cannot comrpomise in quality then I will recommend you the holy trinity lens !

Cz 16-35 2.8
Cz 24-70 2.8
Sal G 70-200 2.8
sure winner , power of zeiss

 

[Daniellius]

You don't need filters for the 50F1.8 and the 35F1.8 since the front element for both is 'sunk in' so you won't have to worry about it being scratch accidently. Also these are prime lens and using UV filters would be a waste as the IQ would be compromised. Other filters like ND and polarisers are more for landscape, which are not what these primes are meant for.

Because of the wide range, the 18-250 is not very fast when compared to 55-200 or 50F1.8 or even the 18-55. It is not suitable for fast shooting moving objects. But it does not focus hunt and the focusing is very accurate even in low light. So still objects are ok.

Thanks for sharing, learn something everyday. And the filters are for my kit zoom actually, i realized my LCD or VF shows high ISO noise with UV on but the photo taken doesnt show it and is nice. Any idea why?

When i saw the video on Tamron 18-250 zooming from one extreme to the other to AF, now i know why ppl says its slow and noisy and get the Sony one instead.

 

[Daniellius]

Well cz brand fetches a premium , then again, that doesnt imply 17-50 f2.8 is not good . And the iq improvement in the cz may be not significant to pay for the premium .

If you cannot comrpomise in quality then I will recommend you the holy trinity lens !

Cz 16-35 2.8
Cz 24-70 2.8
Sal G 70-200 2.8
sure winner , power of zeiss

Yea no argument on the power of Zeiss. Just out of my league..

 

[chanalb]

Thanks for sharing, learn something everyday. And the filters are for my kit zoom actually, i realized my LCD or VF shows high ISO noise with UV on but the photo taken doesnt show it and is nice. Any idea why?

Dunno. I dun use live view much and my view finder is optical not electronic.