Do you think this is a silly purchase

Discussion in 'Nikon Lenses' started by jaomul, Nov 26, 2015.

  1. jaomul

    jaomul Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,715
    Likes Received:
    1,552
    Location:
    Cork Ireland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I'm usually ok making decisions about gear I want or need, and normally just ask for user opinions on certain gear or alternatives I may have overlooked. This one is different.

    I have a sigma 18-35mm f1.8 (underused but great). I decided to trade this and buy a sigma 17-50mm OS f2.8 because I think it would get more use and be a better walkaround lens. The price I was offered on trade was very poor so I put it on a local site but no real interest. I used it last night in a tight enviroment with only ok light and it was great, so I'll probably keep it.

    Do you think its a waste to still purchase the 17-50 because of the overlap.


     
  2. weepete

    weepete TPF Supporters Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,760
    Likes Received:
    2,174
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Yup
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Solarflare

    Solarflare No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    394
    Ultimately lens choices are subjective. What works for one photographer might not work at all for the next one.

    But when I started in photography, for a couple of years I kept buying a new camera that always was slightly better than the previous one, simply because the previous choice was clearly insufficient to my needs.

    At one point I realized that I had spent THOUSANDS of euros on my cameras, but all I had to show for was a couple compact cameras. Had I spent all that money at once, I could have already gotten a pretty sweet setup.

    Nowadays I have a D750, a 28mm f1.8, a 70-200mm f4 and sometimes also a SB910 and/or a 16-35mm f4. Its costy, but I have everything I really need.

    So my general advice would be: Think about whats the optimal setup is you need for your photography, then work towards exactly that setup - instead of thinking about making small improvements to your current setup. Because doing the later is really expensive and inefficient.

    Buying a 17-50mm f2.8 when you already have a 18-35mm f1.8 sounds exactly like such a small improvement. Especially when the 18-35mm f1.8 is already underused.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. D-B-J

    D-B-J Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Messages:
    9,027
    Likes Received:
    2,175
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Those are two very different animals. On a crop body, the 17-50 is great. I had one for two-ish years and loved it. The 18-35 is a low-light animal, and gives a very unique image-quality when shot at 18 and 1.8--if you can swing it, keep both. You may eventually sell one, but you can make that decision later.

    Jake
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. wyogirl

    wyogirl Oh crop!

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,593
    Likes Received:
    611
    Location:
    South West Wyoming
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I agree with SolarFlare but have something to add. Look through the shots that you already have from that lens. Check what focal length you used the most. Look at the photos and ask yourself if you would have wanted to be closer or wider. You need to figure out why the lens you have isn't getting used, and what your needs actually are. Then based on that information... Make a lens purchase.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  6. Peeb

    Peeb Semi-automatic Mediocrity Generator Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,643
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    1. Could you possibly get a better price on ebay?
    2. Maybe the sigma 17-70 2.8 instead, so you use it a bit more?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. jaomul

    jaomul Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,715
    Likes Received:
    1,552
    Location:
    Cork Ireland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Id like both, but I don't know is that just my nerdy gear side or a sensible choice
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. jaomul

    jaomul Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,715
    Likes Received:
    1,552
    Location:
    Cork Ireland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    My needs are simple. I want a 10-600 f1.8 VR thats small and cheap, does macro and goes off the chart at DxO :)

    Seriously though, I really like the 18-35mm. The only reason that it is under used is that I like more flexibility on a zoom. If I head out with a camera and want one lens I'll likely put on my 18-105 for the convenience, and I actually love that lens, but its not a low light option.

    I guess I'd like the 17-50 as its a viable low light option with more flexibility than the 18-35. The 18-35 then is a winner when I need it. I'm greedy
     
  9. jaomul

    jaomul Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,715
    Likes Received:
    1,552
    Location:
    Cork Ireland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    1. Possibly, and I do think if I wait that I'd get asking price here, I'm not in a hurry but have sold stuff before to almost immediately regret it.

    2. The sigma 17-70 f2.8/4 is nice, but if I buy I'd go f2.8 constant
     
  10. The_Traveler

    The_Traveler Completely Counter-dependent Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    18,743
    Likes Received:
    8,044
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic US
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Buying crap because you have a existential 'need' for a feature that you use once a year, maybe, is really dumb, imo.
    It's a tiny step from total gear worship without ever taking pictures.

    Unless your pictures are crap because you don't have it, you don't need it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. jaomul

    jaomul Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,715
    Likes Received:
    1,552
    Location:
    Cork Ireland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I agree mostly, but most gear that I have bought does get used quite regularly. My "buy" filter isn't to bad. I suppose I am trying to justify to myself a good standard lens as an addition, or maybe a replacement to a more speciality lens (that is my least used item)
     
  12. The_Traveler

    The_Traveler Completely Counter-dependent Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    18,743
    Likes Received:
    8,044
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic US
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit


    My best friend is a gear junkie.
    He has 3 Sony A bodies two Nikon bodies, an A6000, lots of lenses, 6 camera bags, three printers and just a whole bunch of stuff.
    He owns every gadget you can think of - and some you can't.

    If I ever sell anything, he wants rights of first refusal.
    That stuff doesn't contribute substantially to his photography.
    He is just as good with/without 90% of the stuff.

    We went to Iceland, he took a body and a lens.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page