p.1 #1 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
I have the 20mm f/2.8, and 35 f2.0. I came across a 20-35 f2.8 for a price less than the resale of both of these primes.
Would you make that exchange for the sake of simplicity?
p.1 #3 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
I am under the impression that the 20-35 is not that good, but I might be wrong. You'd have to wait for people who own/owned the 20-35 to say what they thought about it.
p.1 #4 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
The two lenses together (20 and 35) are smaller and lighter than the zoom. Better optically, too.
So, why? I'd rather get a used 17-35 in ADDITION to having the primes. Actually, I was very close to doing that at one time, but balked at the cost because I have that focal range covered (multiple times, actually).
p.1 #6 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
The primes are fairly inexpensive. And I love the IQ I'm getting from them. They're also very light, and a pleasure to keep on the D700 for a day out.
I guess, sometimes I wish I had both with me, but I seldom carry more than 1 lens with me.
Should I consider simply adding the 24mm or 28mm prime to round out the 20mm, and the 35mm?...Kinda give that 3 steps forward, or three steps back approach.
p.1 #7 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
I have both the 20mm F2.8 and the 35mm F2.
I would keep them both for quality, less flare and compactness.
If you then need a zoom for when things are moving too swiftly to keep up, then add one.
If I were to get another wide it would be either the 14mm F2.8 or a 12-24mm.
20 and 35 is a nice combination that needs no other in between for me.
p.1 #8 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
The 20-35 is actually really sharp and crisp. The colors are nice, but it is prone to flare, as are the majority of wide zooms. I don't think the lens is heavy at all...it's just right, and it focuses pretty darn fast for a non-AFS lens. I'm sure you could capture great images with either of the 3 lenses mentioned.
p.1 #9 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
I'd keep the primes. Unlike the 17-35, the 20-35 doesn't outperform them (although it is quite good). And the 35/2 is still a stop faster, while the 20 is super-compact (smallest AF 20mm on the market).
p.1 #10 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
I've had a 20-35 for over 10 years. I'd make the swap in a heartbeat. It is smaller that the newer wide angle f2.8 zooms and does the job of 2 primes in one package.
p.1 #11 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
My 20-35 is a fantastic copy, and equals my non-AF AI-S 20 2.8 & 35 2.8 in sharpness overall.
It is fairly heavy, though.
eBay was flooded with the 20-35 a few years ago, they seem to be more rare & pricey these days. I bought mine for 300.00 on '06, they seem to go for 550-600 pretty frequently.
p.1 #13 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
I use the 20-35 as well. I think it's a fantastic lens. However, I can only attest to this lens in particular since I haven't used the mentioned primes. But it is sharp sharp sharp. It is prone to flare and has noticeable CA sometimes. Other than that, I love it
p.1 #14 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
WHile we are talking about the 35 2 how does it perform in sharpness contrast color ect in comparison to the 50 1.8 and 50 1.4 which one is it more like??
There is one at my local shop for 215.99 and I am tempted to pick it up but I don't use primes often and when I do it's my 28 2.8 I love the focal length of the 50 on my film cameras but it is to long on a cropped body and the 35 will be right about at it
p.1 #17 · Would you swap a 20 2.8,and 35 2.0 for a 20-35 2.8?
...I tried a 20-35 recently and the color was not very saturated...and the sharpness was not "really" sharp. I shot it on my D700...I could definitely see the difference in the newer coatings. The 35 f/2 is a very nice lens however.
